This Field Frame Analysis maps the competing narratives used by influential organizations to frame the debate on immigration and immigration reform. It finds that narratives that support restrictive immigration policies are more coherent and complete — and therefore more likely to “stick” in the public’s mind — than those that support comprehensive immigration reform. The report concludes with recommendations as to how organizations working towards comprehensive reform can communicate more effectively.
Countries
United States
Related content
Report
Getting to “We”: Mapping the Gaps Between Expert and Public Understandings of Immigration and Immigration Reform
This report lays the groundwork for a larger effort to reframe the public debate on immigration and immigration reform.
Report
WorkShift Methods Supplement
This supplement provides detailed information on the research that informs the first release of FrameWorks’ WorkShi! project on reframing work and labor in the United States.1 Below, we outline...
Report
Six Trends in Public Thinking about Work in the United States
Is the current system of work in the United States—which many experience as insecure, unequal, and disempowering—amenable to a fundamental power shift in favor of workers, away from...