As we head into the November election, Americans are feeling overwhelmed by the number of campaign ads flooding their television and social media channels. It is estimated that by election day more $9.7 billion will have been spent on campaign ads. Between January 6, 2021 and August 7, 2022, 2 million ads issued only on national television.
Unfortunately, the volume of campaign ads can be detrimental to some members of the public due to the heavy emphasis on immigration and immigrants.
While the United States has been home to an anti-immigrant political climate that has politicized Latino immigrants for several election cycles, it appears that the volume of campaign ads focusing on border enforcement has increased this campaign season. America’s Voice has reported 700 unique paid ads viewed 52.6 million times on voter social media they are anti-immigrant, divisive and/or racist. Many of these ads are creating fear and xenophobia by framing the issue of immigration around a “invasion” of immigrants coming to the United States, which breeds fear and anger.
Primaries push candidates to mobilize the most ideologically extreme segments of their respective parties. Therefore, it is not surprising that there was a heavy use of border surveillance and anti-immigrant ads during the Republican primaries. What is surprising, however, is that the southern border was used as a backdrop for campaign ads during the primary season in non-border states. This included ads suggesting that weak borders were responsible for drugs and crime in states so far from the border. like South Carolina and Alabama.
We are interested in how exposure to a large number of anti-immigrant campaign ads can affect the attitudes of the Latino population.
Latino exposure to campaign ads and its impact on Latino families
We drew on the Abriendo Puertas/Unidos National Survey of US Latino Families to get a sense of how widespread exposure to anti-immigrant campaign advertising is among Latinos. The survey asked respondents if they had seen any campaign ads on television or online that they felt discriminated against or intended to make the public think negatively of immigrants. More than a third (36 percent) of Latino parents or primary caregivers indicated they have seen these ads, with a higher percentage of registered voters reporting exposure.
The National Survey of Latino Families asked respondents who saw these ads how they felt. As reflected in the figure below, the most commonly reported reaction among Latinos in the sample was “anger.” This was a particularly common response among foreign-born Latinos (+6 percent relative to their US-born counterparts).
The next two most common reactions identified by respondents are “nervous/anxious” at 40 percent and “scared” at 27 percent. When these two outcomes, which are often measures included in mental health studies, were combined, they were cited by 67 percent of Latinos nationwide. This is consistent with the literature documenting how anti-immigrant policies across the country negatively impacts the mental health of immigrants. Anti-immigrant sentiment was amplified by former President Trump and research has found that there is a Link Between Trump’s Racist Policies and Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety for Latinos.
I have found in my own job that living in states with punitive immigration policies not only affects the health of immigrants, but also that of Latinos in general. This helps explain why nonimmigrant U.S.-born Latinos are more likely to report being nervous or anxious about viewing anti-immigrant campaign ads than are immigrants in the sample (+7 percent for US-born Latinos relative to total). sample).
Another 29 percent of those surveyed indicated that viewing these campaign ads made them feel like “people don’t like me here in the United States.” This is an important response to track, as the social science literature has found that Latinos often report feelings of not belonging or feeling worthless in society when exposed to discrimination.
Reflecting the variation in Latino attitudes, 15 percent of the sample of Latino parents and primary caregivers said they felt the campaign ad they saw “was on point with what to do about immigration policy.” ”.
Implications and possible solutions
The increase in these anti-immigrant ads is indicative of a greater acceptance of this extreme political rhetoric, which unfortunately suggests that the Latino community will continue to be exposed to more stressful political images than ever before. This is an issue that should concern us all given the impact these ads have on Latinos’ perception that they are welcome in this country. Feeling that you belong and are valued in society has huge implications for civic engagement. Seeing evidence that exposure to anti-immigrant campaign ads influences a sense of belonging is troubling for those interested in Latino civic engagement, regardless of which party they choose to support.
To prevent millions of people from being exposed to this, networks must be pressured to ban this kind of hate and fear-mongering from being broadcast.
One way to combat these harmful ads would be to prevent them from being seen in the first place. To prevent millions of people from being exposed to this, networks must be pressured to ban this kind of hate and fear-mongering from being broadcast. Whether filing a complaint through the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to implement regulations or creating social pressure for change, networks are responsible for what they choose to broadcast and must be held accountable.
The implications of a sharp increase in anti-immigrant campaign ads on the mental health of Latin Americans are enormous given the limited access to mental health services that the Latin population has experienced before and during the pandemic. latinos have increased delays in receiving mental health care (twice as likely as white Americans) and are less likely to receive recommended care for depression and anxiety compared to white Americans. Expanding access to quality mental health services to a broader segment of the Latino community will help address the long-term mental health challenges this community faces.
.
