Immigrants and minorities! Be afraid!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/02/15/liz-peek-census-count-illegal-immigrants-democrats-acorn-seiu/

This article is a commentary on the 2010 US Census, intended to raise awareness over certain census procedures that the author considers to be underhanded and politically-motivated. She accuses urban (read: minority) "community organizations" of encouraging census fraud, and calls for the US Census to determine citizenship status so as not to include illegal immigrants in their count. The general tone of the article implies a "vast left-wing conspiracy", and is intended to play on reliable conservative fears.

The article is effective in that it marries hard facts and real concerns with paranoid "culture war" innuendos in a way that appear to give the latter an air of legitimacy. Accordingly, the article will almost certainly resonate with its intended audience (the Fox News online readership).

Given that the census began in January, this article may have passed its kairos. The Census will likely be complete before any meaningful reform could result from an article like this, no matter how influential; and thus it won't be relevant for another 10 years, except in the general sense that it gives conservatives a few more reasons to feel aggrieved and besieged.

Rhetorical Devices:

The article opens with rhetorical questions; "Did you know that the census does not distinguish between illegal immigrants and U.S. citizens? It does not, which raises questions such as: Should Arizona win more seats in the House of Representatives because it harbors a large number of illegal aliens? Or, should people who can’t vote decide how many electoral college votes California is awarded?" These questions lead the reader to some natural conclusions: of course, in a census that determines the partition of the electoral college and House of Representatives, only citizens should be considered--particularly if the alternative is that the decadent People's Republic of California gets more electoral clout.

By alluding to ACORN (though only in the context of stating that ACORN is not cooperating in the Census due to last year's scandal), the author strikes a vein of rich emotional baggage for her audience. To her readers, ACORN is a powerful symbol of liberal amorality and malfeasance; and even if it has literally no involvement in the issue under discussion, it conjures feelings of anger (as well as latent racial and socioeconomic tensions) without forcing the author to resort to open race-baiting or libelous accusations.

For the same reason, the author's diction is extremely important. The article's rhetorical effectiveness is dependent on a general assumption that minority advocacy groups are corrupt, thieving, and dissolute; but, in the interest of political correctness, that fear cannot be openly exploited. Thus, the author uses phrases like "particular communities" when what she means is "inner-city blacks and Hispanics" (but what she really means is "criminals and welfare queens"). Or, she might make broad generalizations, such as, "Minority voters tend to elect Democrats, who generally favor expanded government, to represent them." By speaking this ambiguous conservative cant, she is able to indulge the reader's xenophobia and racism without obviously incriminating herself.

The general tone of the piece is probably the most effective device. The title phrase, "Why You Should Worry", is an excellent summary of the tone of the entire article. Using phrases like "a cozy arrangement" to describe the impact of census policy, and putting key opposition words in quotes to make them appear dubious (Hispanic votes are "undercounted", and the Census is cooperating with 30,000 "partners")--the writer can, without making any explicit accusations, couch the entire situation in an atmosphere of conspiracy and suspicion.

New Media Devices:

By making it easy to "share" their news articles on Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites, news and opinion sites like foxnews.com encourage broader dissemination of their material. One of the strengths of Web 2.0 is that it converts consumers into relay stations to attract more consumers.

The image at the top of the article, depicting a black US Census worker, further cements the racial innuendoes that form the bulk of the written portion.