Journalists more concerned about the truth than the policy impact of their reports Part 3

By Marivir Montebon

This 3rd of 4 parts dissertation by Dr. Marivir Montebon examines how bridging the political divide of U.S. immigration is possible through Transformative Journalism.

Participant journalists covering immigration adhere to truth and accuracy as the prime ethic of their profession. They are not quite concerned with the policy impact their stories may create.

With digital technology heightening misinformation and polarization, they said that writing an immigration story with a human face and empathy are enough challenges.   

This study examined 10 veteran journalists covering immigration on the East Coast and a second group of volunteers and legal advocates who assisted immigrants. Journalists highlighted stories on deportation, immigrant victims of crime, achievement, and DACA, as their best work.

The study assessed truth, balance, impact, personal belief, and editorial policy in coverage. Participants said polarization has intensified in the past decade, especially during the Trump era, with social media amplifying misinformation, weak accountability, and more abrasive opinion.

Truth is tops

All the participants rated being truthful and accurate as their top priority, ensuring that they report and write the basic facts. Not all of them consider creating a policy impact when they write their immigration stories.  

A founding editor of a Filipino print and online magazine could not have said it any better: “Truth and accuracy are the highest principles I uphold. I am fact-based and I get all sides to a story or an issue. My political leaning doesn’t come into play. I am just a storyteller. I don’t slant it towards politics. It will always be the story of the immigrant.”

Digital technology drowns the truth

Digital technology has opened content creation to many people, blurring truth and accuracy amid a constant flood of opinion and misinformation—a daily challenge for professional journalists.

A retired New York Times senior editor and freelance columnist described today’s media environment as “anti-intellectualism creeping in the guise of populism.”

With weakened standards, making truth harder to distinguish from opinion and misinformation.

“Audiences now believe what they want, reducing the value placed on rigorous reporting,” said one journalist.

Another journalist said social media and AI repeatedly recycle and amplify shallow coverage, while the decline of newspapers has reduced depth, editing, and reliability.

Together, these shifts leave journalists competing with speed, commentary, and constant reinterpretation rather than careful reporting grounded in verified information.

“I miss writing for newspapers. You worked closely with an editor, filed your story, and sometimes waited until the next day to see whether it ran—but the information was solid.”

Balance

Traditionally, balance in journalism means presenting both sides of an issue, especially dissenting views, and giving the aggrieved or accused a chance to respond.

“In political justice, you seek the truth. There is only one truth, not two sides to every question.”

The journalist-publisher argued that social justice issues do not always require balance in the same way corruption stories do, where the accused must be heard under the Code of Ethics.

“How do you balance a clear social justice issue? You can listen respectfully, but you must still show when a policy or belief harms people.”

Public Impact

Writing for public impact was a shared concern by the participant journalists, especially on immigration issues. It was ranked second after truth and accuracy. As the journalist publisher puts it, writing or reporting stories that create impact are those which open the eyes of the people to truth.

Influencing policy, as in the goal of policy impact, wasn’t a top concern for the participant journalists, with a median rating of 3.8 among the participants. This meant they were more concerned about delivering truthful stories in real time, regardless of the impact it may create for policy reforms.

Personal belief and satisfaction

Most participants said personal beliefs did not determine whether they reported a story, though staying objective required conscious effort. Two senior editors said they would avoid stories they did not believe in.

One ethnic media journalist argued that complete detachment is impossible, and that lived experience can strengthen reporting by adding cultural context and community perspective. Immigrant journalists said this often made them more empathetic and open-minded on immigration than some white colleagues.

Editorial Policy

Nine out of ten journalists said editorial policy guided how they wrote immigration stories.

One journalist chose to challenge editorial policy and stand by his story, even at personal cost. A journalist-publisher added that reporters aim to stay true to their values while working within newsroom guidelines.

Overall, the study suggests that reporters in both conservative and liberal newsrooms have limited influence over editorial decisions.

One Filipino journalist from a liberal local newspaper reflected:

“I had little say in the editing process, which can limit representation. When more immigrant voices are included, coverage gains depth, understanding, and empathy, helping audiences better see why people come to this country.”

Riding on political stunts

A retired senior editor said immigration is a vast beat spanning culture, politics, economics, and individual lives, yet coverage is often overtaken by national political rhetoric. As a result, reporters may end up covering partisan stunts, such as transporting migrants for political spectacle, instead of deeper immigration issues.   

When Florida Gov. DeSantis decides to fly in newly arrived immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts, for instance, “you are forced to write something that is not really immigration. That is about political stunts. All other issues aside, this could be the promotion of partisan politics,” explained the retired senior editor.

An abundance of immigration stories  

Immigration reporting demands deeper attention to issues often left underexplored, including the growth of the undocumented population, DACA, asylum, border crossings, drug trafficking, and cross-border labor.

A retired senior editor argued that immigration reaches far beyond partisan talking points because it is woven into everyday American life. Rather than repeating conservative and liberal political rhetoric, journalists have a broad and urgent field of stories to investigate, explain, and humanize for the public.

The ethnic media  

Ethnic media has long been a vital part of U.S. journalism, covering immigration more consistently than corporate outlets.

Juan Gonzalez of Democracy Now described three U.S. media sectors: corporate press, alternative press, and ethnic media that grew with migration from the Global South.

Rooted in communities of color and migration, ethnic media can deepen immigration reporting by bringing empathy and attention to immigrants’ own narratives.