Connor Nickerson’s research while affiliated with Boston College and other places

The media plays a crucial role in highlighting the important facts the public should know by selecting, broadcasting, and emphasizing what events the public should classify and comprehend as important and what the public should assess as a threat (Slone Journal of Conflict Resolution 44(4): 508-522, 2000, Papacharissi and de Fatima Oliveira The International Journal of Press/Politics 13(1): 52-74, 2008). This paper explores the notion that the media reinforces a false synonym between Muslims and terrorism. I begin with a description of news framing bias and how this bias impacts the portrayal of terrorism and Muslims through politically and emotionally charged discourse. Then, through a content analysis of local and national news articles, I examine selected terrorist events in France and Turkey, analyzing the U.S media’s portrayal of these events to uncover what elements journalists select, emphasize, and deemphasize in countries with predominantly Muslim and non-Muslim populations. This analysis is useful in uncovering the mechanisms allowing U.S perception of perceived threat to rise in tandem with U.S national security’s placement on the current policy agenda, while the actual risks posed by terrorism and Muslim populations are marginal in comparison and continue to decline (Powell Communication Studies 62(1): 90-112, 2011). The findings suggest that news media framing utilizes biased, negative imagery, portraying the events in these countries in a way that reinforces current prejudices against Muslims, even when Muslims are themselves the victims. This unequal reporting increases viewership while simultaneously allowing current perceptions about terrorism and Muslims to continue.

Prior research shows that anti-immigration sentiment affects public opinion about criminal justice problems and solutions. However, we know little about how these sentiments affect public opinion about human trafficking. This paper attempts to fill this gap by examining the role of anti-immigration sentiment in shaping public support for anti-trafficking efforts in the United States. Specifically, this research examines the effect of anti-immigration sentiment on the public’s understanding about vulnerabilities for human trafficking among migrant populations and corresponding support for policies directed at the protection of migrant trafficked persons. This is particularly important because public policies that safeguard migrant trafficked persons have been among the most difficult to pass despite strong support for the governmental prioritization of anti-trafficking efforts overall. Utilizing public opinion data from an original, nationally representative survey experiment of 2000 Americans, this study finds that anti-immigration sentiment (1) is associated with greater recognition of the vulnerability of immigrants to human trafficking victimization; (2) does not impact public support for a general governmental prioritization of human trafficking policies; yet (3) creates less public support for victim services for non-citizen trafficked persons; and (4) stems from differences in political views impacting support for services for immigrant victims. These findings contribute to an understanding of the role of anti-immigration sentiment in public opinion about crime and have implications for policies aimed at improving the identification of and outcomes for migrant trafficked persons.