Baja California, Mexico: Impact of U.S. Media, an Analysis
Prepared by Scott Hanning and Jeffrey Werner, Emerson Strategic Communication Group
For Mexidata.com
Monday, July 6, 2009
Executive Summary: Through selective reporting, presenting information without context and insufficient analysis, U.S. media outlets have helped perpetuate the mistaken perception that Mexico, including all of Baja California, is a “drug war crisis zone” unsafe for visitors. The net result is the conflation of President Felipe Calderón’s campaign against the drug cartels with tourism in the minds of millions of ordinary Americans, who have chosen to travel elsewhere or stay home. Media coverage of the drug war crisis has thus spawned a second, equally urgent one: Rosarito Beach’s economy, like those of other areas almost entirely dependent on American tourism, has suffered a devastating revenue decline of more than 75%.
Rosarito Beach and Baja California’s other coastal towns have for decades been a popular destination for U.S. tourists. Their economies are largely dependent on American tourism, especially road-trip vacationers from southern California and the Southwest U.S. The region also has a high number of permanent American residents: an estimated 14,000 Americans (nearly 10% of the population) make Rosarito their home today. These communities’ fortunes are therefore directly linked to how Americans view them.
Tourism to Baja California started to decline in mid-2008, as southern California media such as the San Diego Union-Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, and local TV news devoted more space and time to rising levels of cartel-related violence in some areas of Mexico. The story gained some national coverage during the year but it remained largely limited to outlets like the wire services and The New York Times. Consequently, it remained underreported to the vast majority of the American public. It should be less of a surprise, then, that Mexican tourism as a whole actually increased slightly in 2008 and the beginning of 2009 as Americans sought out high-value, low-cost destinations near home in the midst of the ongoing worldwide recession. ARE YOU SURE ON THIS? However, Rosarito, given its proximity to Tijuana, an area perceived by Americans to be under constant siege, did not share in this increase.
The situation abruptly worsened in late 2008 and early 2009, when media outlets across the U.S. began releasing stories en masse related to President Calderón’s now-two-year old campaign against the drug cartels. A “perfect storm” of factors caused the increase. First, a US military report released in November, the “Joint Operating Environment 2008” (JOE 2008), outlined 25 years worth of speculative strategic scenarios including Mexico’s “sudden rapid collapse” as one among many other more serious and likely possibilities. Second, as Calderón’s campaign succeeded in capturing or killing cartel leaders, those that took their place displayed a level of brutality unknown to their predecessors. Third, a wave of kidnappings centered in the Phoenix, AZ area almost exclusively among people involved with drug and/or human smuggling fueled unsubstantiated fears that violence could “spill over” the border. All of this occurred as violence levels skyrocketed in border communities like Nuevo Laredo, Ciudad Juarez, and to a somewhat lesser extent, Tijuana.
As the story evolved from a pattern, to a trend, to ultimately a crisis, it gained ominous-sounding series names that did little to clarify its true complexity: “Mexico Under Siege” (LA Times), “Mexico at War” (Washington Post), “The War Next Door” (CNN), etc. The lack of context in most of these reports, especially prior to Secretary of State Clinton’s visit in mid-March, only compounded the problem. In the case of the 56-page JOE 2008 report, for example, the contingency of Mexico becoming a failed state is mentioned in only two paragraphs. By contrast, the same possibility in Pakistan takes up a page and general issues concerning Russia and China, 3 pages each. Moreover, the report specifically disclaims, “this document is speculative in nature and does not suppose to predict what will happen.” This was mostly ignored in ensuing news coverage, and instead the hypothetical case was reported and re-reported as a likely near-term event.
A U.S. State Department travel “alert” posted on February 20, 2009 – right before the crucial Spring Break season – for certain areas of Mexico was similarly misreported. One of two types of State Department notices, an “alert” suggests that travelers exercise caution in specific portions of a country due to a short-term condition, while a much stronger “warning” recommends avoiding an entire country because of endemic instability. This alert, essentially a renewal of one first issued almost three years prior, was regularly and inaccurately characterized as the latter. A State Department spokesman’s March 6 clarification that the alert was not intended to direct tourists to completely avoid Mexico was often overlooked. Additionally, the limited geographic nature of the alert was often ignored: although Tijuana was mentioned by name (with qualifications), Rosarito was not, and the alert focused mainly on the hazards of travel to Juarez, a city over 600 miles away and never an American tourist destination to begin with. This would be akin to warning tourists away from the Jersey Shore in the 1920′s because of mob clashes with the FBI in Chicago.
Another type of problematic reporting involves the recycling of high-drama crimes, usually involving Americans, without regard for when they actually occurred. While these stories are typically tied into ongoing coverage of the drug war, links to the cartels are made tenuously if at all. A December 28, 2008 “ABC World News” report told of a San Diego-area couple brutally robbed by armed men who broke into their RV, and also sexually assaulted the woman. Crucial background was omitted, however: the incident occurred 13 months prior and they were alone, away from tourist zones in an isolated area south of Ensenada, over 40 miles away from Rosarito. Further, they were extensively profiled by both local and national media in early 2008. Similarly, Anderson Cooper interviewed the crusading family of a kidnapped and murdered Mexico City businessman as part of an early 2009 “60 Minutes” piece. He, too, failed to mention that the incident occurred in 2006, before Calderón took office, and was already well publicized.
Because most news media tend to focus on conflict, but not places where conflict is absent, towns like Rosarito are rarely depicted. American audiences don’t read, hear, or see that fighting between and against cartels is generally concentrated in far-away places and has not affected daily life on the ground there, especially for tourists. People uninvolved with drugs have not been targeted or victimized, nor have tourist areas been the site of violence. Even the recent assault in Acapulco was in the run-down former tourist corridor, which is several miles away from its current core. It is extremely unlikely that a foreign visitor would inadvertently end up in such an area. Similarly, the current front line of the campaign, Ciudad Juarez, is hundreds of miles away from Rosarito. Little or none of this below-the-surface detail makes its way into most media reports. Consequently, readers, listeners, and viewers are left with the impression that all of Mexico is a violent, lawless place ready to collapse, which is simply not supported by evidence.
Media rhetoric has evolved notably over the course of the crisis. Initially, it amounted to little more than occasional mention of a “Mexican” problem, then gradual recognition of its worsening even as it remained “theirs”. This changed amid a climate of fear at the first signs the problem could potentially become an “American” one also. The narrative shifted dramatically after President Obama’s inauguration, however, when he unprecedentedly acknowledged that American demand, rather than Mexican supply, fueled drug smuggling into the U.S. as well as its side effects in both countries. Secretary Clinton then explicitly proclaimed, “We stand with you!” during her March visit, a sentiment repeatedly bolstered by the President during his trip in April. Afterward, coverage of cartel-related violence began to include more nuance and careful reporting, but stories quickly faded in the early panic over the H1N1 (originally “Mexican”) flu, which incidentally is now theorized to have originated in Asia.
U.S. media have largely focused on other topics since then, but the damage to Mexico is done: the entire country has been painted as a war zone, a depiction detached from reality in places like Rosarito. With the flu-related furor now abated, drug war stories are trickling out once again. Given the decline in extreme episodes of violence relative to earlier this year, coverage now centers on corruption and weapons trafficking. To be sure, the drug cartels remain a serious threat. As Secretary Clinton pointed out during her visit, these highly organized criminals use vast sums of money from American drug consumers to buy high-powered weaponry and ammunition in the U.S. and to smuggle them back over the border to circumvent Mexico’s strict gun laws. Drug money is also used to buy off government and law enforcement officials, although Calderón’s anti-corruption thrust now shows some signs of success.
One critical fact remains clear, however: there is no evidence or history of tourists being harmed by cartel-related violence. Further, the threat of so-called “spillover” violence into the border states that spawned a great deal of coverage in the pre-April period has failed to materialize. Nor has Mexico become the failed state so vigorously predicted earlier in the year. None of these facts are actively reported to the American public.
Rosarito has in fact taken an approach to press coverage that is uncharacteristically proactive for Mexican communities in a crisis. Specifically, Mayor Hugo Torres has aggressively attempted to meet and dialogue with journalists about problematic stories and factual inaccuracies. This important relationship, an essential component of effective crisis communication, has been mutually beneficial: journalists and interest groups have official input from the municipality and the Mayor, along with his staff, have developed a better understanding of the dynamics of today’s media environment.
While violent confrontation between cartels and the military continues in parts of Mexico, the conflict has a minimal effect on life in Rosarito. The current plunge in tourism revenue is the unfortunate side effect of inaccurate reporting, speculative scenarios described as near-term probabilities, and the failure to put facts in their proper context. There are fewer camera crews and reporters in Mexico now, and in most cases, they never visited places like Rosarito in the first place. Unfortunately, the people of Rosarito are unfairly suffering the loss of their livelihood because Americans have been given the false impression that their lives are at risk if they visit. It is hoped that a calmer, more critical analysis of the facts can emerge, one that does not hide the truth, but accurately depicts life in Rosarito as welcoming, safe, and affordable.
Did you ever notice that your neighborhood is “safe” and crime occurs elsewhere?
