ìAnti-Nicaraguan Xenophobia and Newspaper Editorial Policy in Costa Rica:Ý Analysis and Suggestionsî
Lea Bishop
Immigrants from Nicaragua, attracted by the availability of more jobs and better salaries than in their home country, currently constitute somewhere around 8% of Costa Ricaís inhabitants.Ý Despite a generally favorable government policy, the popular reaction to this phenomenon has been less welcoming.Ý Most Costa Ricans possess negative stereotypes of Nicaraguans, and a sizeable minority expresses attitudes that can only be characterized as xenophobic.Ý
This climate creates a situation which negatively impacts Nicaraguan workersí enjoyment of their human rights in multiple ways.Ý Aside from social marginalization, Nicaraguan immigrants, whether legally or illegally resident in Costa Rica, face discrimination in employment and housing, and are sometimes denied their legally-established rights to health care and other services by resentful gatekeepers.Ý A study by the International Institute for Human Rights led them to conclude:ìThe need for respect for the right to freedom from discrimination based on nationality or membership in a social group was revealed in the stories of Nicaraguan women interviewed in Costa Rica, who indicated that they felt humiliated and degraded for being Nicaraguan.Ý The women claimed that in Costa Rica, ëonly Costa Ricans have rights,í that the doors of institutions are closed to them, and the most difficult jobs are left to them.î[1]
Costa Rica prides itself on being a country where human rights are respected and has a liberal tradition of eager adoption of reforms.Ý So far, however, little attention has been paid to the problem of ethnic and racial discrimination within its borders.Ý This paper examines the role news media play in the formation of anti-Nicaraguan xenophobia among Costa Ricans, and offers practical suggestions for how this aspect of the human rights situation could be improved.
The Nicaraguan minority in Costa Rica
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ According
to the 1999 Estado de la NaciÛn report, ìThe number of Nicaraguan immigrants is
reliably estimated at between 300,000 and 340,000, representing between 7.8%
and 8.8% of Costa Ricaís total population, projected at 3,856,191 for 1999.î[2]
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ This sum
encompasses many different categories of immigrants: temporary and permanent
residents, refugees, political asylees, retirees, and undocumented or ìillegalî
immigrants (Quesada and CODEHUCA 15) In addition to the number of Nicaraguan
nationals in residence, Costa Rica also has a much smaller population of nicarag¸enses naturalizados who are now
Costa Rican citizens.[3]Ý The majority of these migrants come to Costa
Rica to find work.Ý Unemployment
currently affects 45 ñ 65% of households in Nicaragua (CID-Gallup Nicaragua
1997-1999).[4]
Additionally, 27% of Nicaraguan households report having difficulty meeting
basic food needs.[5]Ý This desperate economic situation in
Nicaragua ìforces thousands of people to emigrate informally - either
temporarily or permanently ñ to Costa Rica, a country with a different history
which is seen by migrants as a ëprivilegedí country and their closest option to
improve their conditions of living (Quesada and ComisiÛn para la Defensa de los
Derechos Humanos en CentroamÈrica 1998, 10)î.Ý
Currently, some 10% of Nicaraguan households receive remittances from a
family member in Costa Rica.[6]
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ Nicaraguan workers in Costa Rica tend to perform the jobs which are least desirable, due to their long hours, low wages, and insecurity, such as agricultural labor, security services, low-skill construction labor, and domestic service. [7]Ý This unenviable labor situation is often further aggravated by employers who take advantage of Nicaraguan workers¥ infamiliarity with their labor rights, precarious legal status, or economic desperation to violate Costa Ricaís worker-protection laws.Ý
Popular accounts
of Nicaraguan immigration to Costa Rica - and, to a lesser extent, social
scientific ones - tend to suggest two related myths.Ý The first of these is that Nicaraguan immigration is a recent
phenomenon, relatively insignificant until the 1970s. The second myth is that
the Nicaraguan immigration was originally motivated by political conditions in
Nicaragua, with economic considerations becoming the dominant force only in the
1990s. In fact, economically motivated Nicaraguan immigration has been a significant
force in Costa Rica since at least the 19th century. [8]ÝÝ However, the perception is that Nicaraguan
migration is a relatively new phenomenon has undoubtedly contributed to the
crisis rhetoric regarding los
nicarag¸enses.[9]Ý University
of Costa Rica sociologist Patricia Alvarenga writes that ì the ëNicaraguan
issueí has become one of the ëcontinuing worriesí of the Costa Rican communityî
(1997, 38).[10]Ý Between October 1998 and October
1999, CID-Gallup Costa Rica poll respondents were asked five times to choose
from a list the principal problem facing the country.Ý Each time, between 7% and 17%Ý
[mean 12%] selected ìMuchos Nicarag¸ensesî above crime/violence,
housing, governmental corruption, cost of living, drugs, moral values,
unemployment, and the poor condition of highways.[11]Ý When asked to choose Costa Ricaís two
greatest problems in October 1999, 20% of respondents listed the Nicaraguans as
the first or second greatest problem.[12]
Carlos Sandoval (2000) reports that Nicaraguan immigrant workers feel that Costa Ricans perceive them as criminals or, at best, as a social burden, and that the immigrants resent this.Ý He adds, ìThe daily practice of making fun of Nicaraguans more often than speaking of them, reflects and reveals something of ourselves . . . Jokes about skin color [It is generally held that Nicaraguans are darker than Costa Ricans] and accent remind us of a xenophobic and ñ why not say it ñ racist component of the hegemonic national identity of Costa Ricaî (2000, vii).
Public opinion data helps to imagine how wide-spread such sentiments really are.Ý In July1999, CID-Gallup researchers asked survey respondents [some of whom may in fact be Nicaraguan immigrants] what they thought should be done about Nicaraguan immigration. Only 10% of those surveyed advocate an open-border policy, with the majority (62%) advocating the deportation of illegal immigrants and a substantial sector (25%) supportingìkick out all the Nicaraguans.î[13]Ý In an issue similar to that raised by California¥s Proposition 187, 30% of those polled in 1999 thought that Nicaraguan children attending schools in Costa Rica should be excluded from a state program which gives small grants given to poor families to purchase school uniforms and materials.Ý However, the majority (65%) say all children should be eligible.[14]
These numbers
indicate that most Costa Ricans feel legal immigration should continue and are
not bothered by the extension of government social benefits to immigrants.Ý However, a sizeable minority of the Costa
Rican population ñ perhaps 20 to 30% - has strong anti-immigration sentiments that can only be
characterized as xenophobia.
Thus, for many Nicaraguan migrants, the already difficult reality of working in Costa Rica is worsened by the experience of discrimination, as illustrated by this quote from a Nicaraguan worker:
With the current economic
crisis in Nicaragua being so bad, one dreams that a country like this [Costa
Rica], so talked about over there, will have abundant work, one believes that
things are easy there, but upon going to the other country you realize that it
is very different from your own, that the customs and way of life are very
different and, for example, in the racism and even oneís own compatriots treat
you very badly.Ý ÖPeople donít accept
someone coming from another country to take the jobs they had; they are angry
with us.Ý In certain parts of
[government] institutions, foreigners donít have rights. . . . (quoted in
Morales and Castro 1999, 136)
This perspective is not universal among Nicaraguan guest workers in Costa Rica.Ý CID-Gallup pollsters asked Nicaraguans with family members in Costa Rica how they had been treated there.Ý Only 9% of respondents said that their family member had received ìvery badî treatment in Costa Rica, 15% chose ìsomewhat bad,î 41% said ìsomewhat good,î 20% reported ìvery goodî treatment, and 15% were not sure or did not respond.[15]Ý However, problems are sufficiently wide-spread to constitute a major concern from a human rights viewpoint.
Social scientific explanations of anti-Nicaraguan prejudice
Research on Nicaraguans in Costa Rica published in the 1970s and 1980s focused on the Nicaraguans as a political refugee population, finally giving way in the early to mid-1990s to a still-growing academic literature on Nicaraguans as migrant workers.[16]Ý However, research which takes popular attitudes toward Nicaraguan immigration, and the experience of discrimination by this community as its central focus has only recently appeared in the academic literature and is still sparse.Ý
A
1997 article by University of Costa Rica sociologist Carlos Sandoval appears to
be the first theoretical approach to ethnic prejudices between Nicaraguans and
Costa Ricans.[17]Ý Drawing
on symbolic interaction theory, Sandoval writes that ìidentities are constructed
through interaction with the other, as part of a psycho-social and
socio-cultural organizationî in a context of given power relations (1997:
31); at its extreme, the constructed other ceases to become human, serving only
as a target for hate.Ý In the Costa Rican case, he writes, ìNicaraguans
are the ëotherí against which, in large measure, the Costa Rican population
defines itselfî (29). According
to the author, in the 1990ís anti-nicarguan sentiment ñ which in the 1980s had
a political basis ñ has become more racialized, while also including an element
of class bias.Ý He explains: ìthe
ëNicasí are dark-skinned and above all poor.Ý
This defines them.Ý In contrast,
Nicaraguan citizens who are financially successful have no nationality; they
are businessmen.î(2000: ix)
Alvarenga
(1997) conducted 25 conversational interviews with Nicaraguan and Costa Rican
residents in three Central Valley shanty towns.[18]Ý Alvarenga identifies three aspects important
to the construction of the nica:
differences in the accent and speech patterns, a purported tendency to
violence, and darker skin.Ý Each of
these aspects is viewed negatively: the Nicaraguan accent is made fun of,
violence is contrasted with the Costa Rican paz,
darker skin is considered
ugly.Ý Additionally, Costa Ricans also
characterize Nicaraguans as good physical laborers.Ý Alvarenga highlights competition for space and work, a
sense of Costa Ricaís racial cultural superiority among residents of the
countryís central valley,[19]
and the imagined national community as the major factors which lead to
anti-Nicaraguan sentiment.
National
stereotypes: paz versus violencia
Morales 1999 writes that frequently, stereotypes are fed about Nicaraguan workers that are not supported by empirical studies.[20] Specifically, Nicaraguans are widely believed to be violent, at least more so than Costa Ricans, and to be responsible for a large proportion of the crime in Costa Rica.Ý While both Sandoval and Alvarenga mention the perception of Nicaraguans as violent, in my opinion this stereotype deserves even more attention than they have given in, particularly in the context of the Costa Rican self-identity as a people of paz. ÝÝEven in rural areas where the image of Nicaraguans as socio-economically and racially inferior is less powerful than in the Central Valley, the belief in a Nicaraguan tendency to violence (and, by association, criminality) appears virtually universal among Costa Ricans.Ý
While this binary construction of Costa Rican paz in opposition to Nicaraguan violence has roots going back to the founding of the two states (Sandoval 1997), [21] it has been especially emphasized since the Contra conflict of the 1980s.Ý Throughout this ten-year international drama, such a cause of concern for Costa Rica, Costa Ricans learned to associate Nicaragua with war, and their own country with the influence for peace. In 1989 when respondents to a University of Costa Rica survey were asked to choose between the statements ìEl costarricense busca la paz,î or ìEl costarricense busca la guerra,î 94.4% responded that Costa Ricans are peaceful, while only 2.3% said that they were aggressive, representing greater agreement than any other national trait tested in the survey.[22]Ý Even today, when asked to describe the positive traits of their country and society, paz is the word most frequently mentioned by Costa Ricans.
Sandoval writes that ìIn truth, Costa Rican ëuniquenessí and exceptionality have frequently been constructed with reference to the other nations of Central America and in particular with relation to Nicaraguaî (2000: viii).Ý This is clearly the case with the Costa Rican self-identity as a nation of peace and stability, the virtuous exception within a chaotic and violent region. The Spanish conception of paz, as explained by Costa Ricans, goes beyond the English translation ìpeaceî to connote not only the absence of war, but also generalized conditions of civil social interaction, lack of crime, and democratic government.Ý It is therefore perhaps to be expected that Costa Rican consciousness should use the resident Nicaraguan minority as a scapegoat for crime, thereby preserving its self-image as a people of paz.
Bourgios (1989) notes the scapegoat role played by Nicaraguan guest workers for the social ill of crime, writing:Ý ìThe Costa Rican ideology of natural peacefulness assumed an almost xenophobic, racist dynamic.Ý The press often blamed major crimes and political confrontations on foreigners, especially Nicaraguans.î[23] It is common to hear Costa Ricans state that Nicaraguans are responsible for ìhalfî or ìmore than halfî of crimes committed in Costa Rica.[24]
Scapegoating is the use of a social out-group as the target of blame for any of various perceived social ills, such as crime, economic hardship, moral decay, etc. The American social psychologist Allport explains the source of scapegoating as the human desire to explain our frustrations and problems with reference to a human agency; ìThis quirk, unless it is strenuously disciplined, predisposes us to prejudice.Ý While in reality our frustrations and ills are frequently due to impersonal causes ñ to altered economic conditions, to the tides of social and historical change ñ unless we fully realize this fact we tend to slip into the habit of blaming our lot upon identifiable human agents (scapegoats)î (166).Ý
Intrinsic to the process of scapegoating is the use of stereotypes (Cersosimo 1978).Ý These stereotypes often arise from real but minor differences between groups, that are exaggerated to the point that they become central to one groupís perception of the other.Ý Once stereotypes are formed, they are hard to dislodge.Ý Allport notes that persons with stereotypes treat evidence which confirms the stereotype as significant, while disregarding contradictory evidence as an exception or fluke: ìWe selectively admit new evidence to a category if it confirms us in our previous belief.î(22)Ý This effect is also known as the selective exposure hypothesis (Wilson 1985).Ý
Wilson notes the role of the media in creating and sustaining stereotypes about minority groups in the United States, writing that ìthe studies that have been done show that negative, one-sided, or stereotyped media portrayals and news coverage do reinforce racist attitudes in those members of the audience who do have them and can channel mass actions against the group that is stereotypically portrayed.î(44-45)Ý
A study of reporting by the Costa Rican papers La NaciÛn and La Republica in 1994 and 1995 found that the press had engaged in
sensationalist reporting contributing to a stereotype of Nicaraguans as
criminal; ìthe medias of mass communication frecuently issue commentaries which
foment xenophobia and implicate Nicaraguans in criminal occurances which,
together with the national populationís general intolerance, heightens social
rejection and discrimination against Nicaraguans.î [25]Ý A
report of the Commission for Human Rights in Central America also charges that
the distortionate protrayal of Nicaraguan immigration by the media ìhas
encouraged xenophobia and social rejection toward Costa Ricaís northern
neighborsî[26]Ý
According to Gianini Segnini, journalist for La Nacion, editors have instituted reforms in response to these criticisms.Ý For example, La NaciÛn takes care not to highlight the nationality of Nicaraguan supects mentioned in crime stories by using ìnicaî[27] in the title or photo captions. In December 1999, a series of articles appeared in the Costa Rican daily periodical La NaciÛn as part of a special report on Nicaraguan immigration prepared by Segnini.Ý In an interview, she explained that the idea for the investigative report came from the desire to deflate the atmosphere of crisis created around the previous amnesty.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ The reporter stated that she felt the articles had effected an important change in perception of the Nicaraguan population in Costa Rica, for example by shattering the stereotype that Nicaraguans are responsible for a large portion of crimes in Costa Rica.Ý Unfortunately, this is over-optimistic, as the stereotype is still alive and well.Ý
In 2000, Costa
Ricans who told me that Nicaraguans
committed much of the crime in Costa Rica, still commonly explained that they
know this from reading the paper, where reports of ìoutrageous crimesî by
Nicaraguans appear ìdailyî or ìalmost every day.îÝ To understand what this means, it is necessary to take both a
quantitative and a qualitative look at crime reporting in the Costa Rican
media.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ
The focus selected is the news section of La NaciÛn, Costa Rica¥s most-read daily paper, [28]Ý which, in terms of its prestige and influence, might be likened to the New York Times of Costa Rica.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ To estimate the frequency with which crime reports involve a Nicaraguan suspect, aÝ random sample of articles was selected for analysis from the journalís on-line archive through the use of key words and date limits, intended to look at coverage of crime stories.Ý Articles in the nation section from October 2000 were searched for the keywords ìvÌctimaî and ìOIJî (the initials of the Costa Rican department which investigates crimes.) Twenty-three articles were returned, of which 10 were full-length articles and 13 were examples of the daily ìSÌntesis Policialî feature, which contains short summaries of several crime-related news items. While some crime reports within the month of October 2000 were clearly not captured by the random sampling, 65 separate reported incidents, ranging from auto accidents to drug arrests to jury verdicts, were analyzed.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ According
to a La Nacion crime reporter
interviewed, the nationality of suspects and victims is recorded by the police
department as part of the information they share with the media, and mentioned
in an article whenever the citizenship is foreign.Ý Thus, whenever an article does not mention a perpetratorís
citizenship, we may assume that the suspect is Costa Rican.
Of the ten feature-length articles examined,
only one, dealing with the capture of an attempted murder suspect,[29]
mentions the citizenship of the suspect. While the article never uses the word
ìnicarag¸ense,î it states that the arrested figure is an ìextranjeroî recently
returned to Costa Rica from Nicaragua.Ý
The nationality of the victim of the attempted murder is not
mentioned.Ý However, readers would
probably infer that both are Nicaraguan.
Among the SintesÌs Policial features, 4 out of
55 (7%) mention the nationality of a suspect.Ý
One involves a kidnapping in Panama in which three Costa Ricans and two
Panamanians are reported to be implicated.[30]ÝÝ Within the same bulletin, another feature
reports that a Czech couple was arrested at San JosÈís international airport
for cocaine possession.Ý A third feature
implicates a Nicaraguan woman in an attempt to illegally introduce prescription
drugs to Costa Rica across the northern border.[31]Ý The final feature makes reference to a
captured Colombian suspect.
Thus, out of a total 65 crime-related stories
reported by La Nacion in October 2000, only 2 (3%) involved Nicaraguan
suspects. This data shows that it is relatively rare that a news story appears
detailing a crime committed by a Nicaraguan citizen in Costa Rica, and that the
paper does not disproportionately choose to report crimes committed by
Nicaraguans.Ý Statistically, the paperís
crime coverage suggests, accurately, that Nicaraguan citizens commit around 3%
of Costa Ricaís crimes.Ý How then to
explain the perception of average citizens that ìthe majority of crimes one
reads about in the newspaper are committed by Nicaraguansí?
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ A more selective look at three articles which
recently appeared in La Nacion helps
to elucidate the answer.Ý In two of
these articles, the perpetrator and the victims are identified as
Nicaraguans.Ý (The aggressor and victim
in the third case were Costa Rican.) Each involves a man who shot and killed an
intimate partner (and, in two of the cases, other victims also), and then shot
himself. All three murder-suicides took place within the space of eight days at
the end of October and the beginning of November 2000.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ The
persons involved in the narratives of two cases involving Nicaraguan
perpetrators are shown in the following charts, in order of their appearance in
the articles.[32]Ý Names are given as fully as they were
reported in the article.
ÝÝìTragedia por lÌo pasional,î
La NaciÛn, November 2, 2000.
|
Character |
Role |
Nationality |
# of times nationality
mentioned |
|
Wilfrido Romero Solbabarro |
Aggressor |
Nicaraguan |
4 |
|
Mercedes Sirias LÛpez |
Victim, exgirlfriend of aggressor |
Nicaraguan |
2 |
|
MarÌa MartÌnez LÛpez |
Victim, landlady of Sirias |
Nicaraguan |
3 |
|
Argelio Morales |
Witness |
Not mentioned |
|
|
Mora |
Siriasí new boyfriend |
Not mentioned |
|
|
Geovanna Cruz |
Witness |
Not mentioned |
|
|
Jorge Gonz·lez |
Husband of MartÌnez |
Resides in Nicaragua |
1 |
|
Berta Berm™dez |
Mother of Sirias |
Not mentioned |
|
ìMatÛ a dos y se suicidÛ,î La
NaciÛn, November 6, 2000.
|
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ Character |
Role |
Nationality |
# of times nationality
mentioned |
|
¡ngel RenÈ Herrera Cerdas |
Victim, uncle of exgirlfriend |
Nicaraguan |
2 |
|
Pastora Herrera Cerdas |
Victim, aunt of exgirlfriend |
Nicaraguan |
5 |
|
InÈs Arnoldo Moreno Rivera |
Aggressor |
Nicaraguan |
5 |
|
Ana MartÌnez |
Victim (but survived), exgirlfriend |
Nicaraguan |
5 |
|
Jorge Arturo Granados |
Witness |
Not mentioned |
|
|
David V·squez |
Landlord of victims |
Not mentioned |
|
From the above charts, it is apparent that
while the nationality of the criminal and the victims is mentioned and
emphasized by repeated references, the nationality of the other persons
involved is not considered to be relevant to the narrative.Ý This was confirmed in an interview with the
author of the first article, who said that the nationality of witnesses is not
generally considered relevant, but is always reported for victims and
perpetrators.[33]
According to this reporter, special care is taken with reporting crimes involving Nicaraguans to avoid reinforcing xenophobia: ìWe always take more care with Nicaraguans because society sees them as inferior. . . .Ý They are involved in many crimes and thus people are afraid of them.Ý So we treat those stories with greater caution.Ý If itís not very necessary to say the suspect is Nicaraguan. . . itís always mentioned in the text, but itís better not to put it in the headline or in the photo captionsî [elipsis in original, translation mine].[34]Ý Another reporter for the same paper affirmed that this is the current editorial policy, fashioned in response to earlier criticisms.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ In part, an analysis of these two articles supports this statement.Ý In neither of these articles does the title or the caption beneath the accompanying photo mention that the persons involved are Nicaraguan.Ý However, in both of these two articles, the national identity of the persons involved is highlighted by mentioning it in the first sentence.Ý The first article opens: ìA romantic conflict between a Nicaraguan couple ended in tragedy yesterday in Los Dique de Cartago, taking the lives of both lovers, the child the woman was carrying in her womb, and the owner of the house where the foreigner [the woman] was livingî[35] [translation mine]. The opening sentence of the second article makes reference to the first, saying ìAnother disgrace occured yesterday among Nicaraguans resident in the country.î[36] [translation mine]Ý This connection is elaborated seven paragraphs later: ìThis occurance took place five days after a romantic conflict between a Nciaraguan couple ended by taking the lives of three people in Los Diques de Cartago, including a pregnant woman.Ý In that case, Wilfrido Romero Sobalbarro, 22 years old, ended the life of his exlover, Mercedes Sirias LÛpez, 24, who was six months pregnant.Ý He also killed the owner [female] of the residence where his exgirlfriend lived and then shot himself in the head.î [translation mine]
Three days before the first of these two incidents, another article appeared in La NaciÛn describing a woman shot and killed by her partner, who later committed suicide.[37]Ý In this case, the persons involved were Costa Rican nationals. The conclusion of this article reads: ìThe death of Eyleen Lezama follows that of 17 other persons who have died of domestic violence this year.Ý At the moment, a legal project in the Legislative Assembly aspires to educate three specialized justices to hear cases of domestic aggression in Heredia, Alejuela y Cartago [cities within the San Jose metropolitan area].î
One would expect a connection to be drawn
between two murder-suicides between intimate partners occurring within a four
days of each other.Ý However, the
November 6 article, instead of reporting that three murder-suicides have been
committed by men against their partners in the last eight days, only reports
that two such crimes occurred between Nicaraguans.Ý Thus, in this case, it is clearly the nationality of the persons
involved and not the crime committed which is being compared and highlighted.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ
We found that crime stories which involve Nicaraguan suspects appear relatively rarely in La Nacion.Ý About 3% of reports involve Nicaraguans, suggesting that such stories appear about once a week in the paper,[38] and not every day, as many Costa Ricans say.Ý Two things help to explain why many Costa Ricans continue to hold the counter-factual belief that Nicaraguans are responsible for the majority of Costa Ricaís crime.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ First, though articles portraying Nicaraguan criminals are rare, this may be the only time that Nicaraguan residents appear in the paper defined as such.Ý For example, a Nicaraguan mother interviewed for an article on the cost of living is not likely to be identified as Nicaraguan in the article, nor is the high school student or the union leader.Ý In this light it is understandable that some Costa Ricans think that all or most Nicaraguan residents in their country are criminals ñ they are simply imagining the world as they have seen it represented in the media.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ Second,
reports of crimes by Nicaraguans stick out in the public imagination.Ý In part, this is because it confirms the
stereotype people already hold, serving a scapegoat function that places the
blame for crime outside the imagined social community onto the ìother.îÝ However, this is encouraged by the current
style of reporting crimes by residents who are not Costa Rican citizens.Ý While
La NaciÛn takes care not to highlight
the nationality of Nicaraguan supects by using ìnicaî in the title or photo
captions, articles about crimes may still emphasize this identity by reporting
in the first paragraph that the suspect is nicarag¸ense,
and mentioning the nationality several times throughout the article.Ý Journalists, like any citizen, are
susceptible to the false but widely-held perception that Nicaraguans are
inclined to criminality, and reporting occasionally reveals and reinforces this
fallacious association.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ Several reforms are
urgently needed.Ý First, in light of the
opinion-molding role played by the mass media, journalists and editors in all
forms of media should receive sensitivity training to examine and correct false
stereotypes about Nicaraguan immigrants, particularly in the area of their
putative criminality.Ý Second, media
should consider a blanket policy of not reporting foreign criminalsí
nationality, particularly if Costa Rican citizens are not identified as
such.Ý While citizenship does have some
relevance from a legal point of view, this consideration should, in my opinion,
be outweighed by the compelling harm to public interest which it unintendedly
results in.Ý At the very least, editors
should discourage reporters from emphasizing a criminalís nationality by
mentioning it several times within an article.
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ Even if newspapers and
other media completely stopped reporting the nationality of criminal suspects,
the public belief that Nicaraguans are responsible for a large proportion of
Costa Ricaís crime should not be expected to disappear quickly on its own.Ý The media must take positive steps to
replace this stereotype with a more accurate image of Nicaraguan immigration.Ý Crucial to this is to depict Nicaraguan
residents in other, positive roles; as mothers, workers, community activists,
students, etc.Ý Care must be taken to
ensure that these depictions do not come across as highlighted exceptions to
the general rule.Ý The statistical fact
that Nicaraguan residents are model citizens in terms of crime, committing half
as many offenses in proportion to thier size in the population as do Costa
Ricans, a fact which should come as no surprise considering that most came to
Costa Rica to improve their lives through honest work.Ý Finally, and most importantly, journalists
should research and write articles which directly address the existence of
discrimination and false negative stereotypes as they affect the relationship
between Nicaraguans and Costa Ricans.Ý
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ If a sustained effort is undertaken by Costa Rican media to address this problem inÝ a way that captures the national consciouness, stereotypes can be undone and prejudices changed.Ý Only this can create a climate of harmony in which the right of immigrants to freedom from discrimination can be enjoyed, and the laudable Costa Rican values of equality, tolerance, and respect for human rights be truly achieved.
Ý
ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝ
AcuÒa Ortega, Victor Hugo. ìHistoria del
vocabulario polÌtico en Costa Rica: Estado, rep™blica, naciÛn y democracia
(1821-1949),î in Identidades nacionales y
Estado moderno en CentroamÈrica, ed. Arturo Taracena A. And Jean Piel,
63-74. San JosÈ: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 1995.
Adorno, T. W., Else Frenkel-Brunswick, Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford. The Authoritarian Personality. New York: The Norton Library, 1969.
Alvarenga Venutolo, Patricia. Conflictiva convivencia: los nicarag¸enses
en Costa Rica. San JosÈ: Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales,
1997.
Araya RamÌrez, Mercedes, et. al. Fuerza de trabajo nicarag¸ense en el sector
informal de la economÌa de Costa Rica y sus condiciones de vida. San JosÈ:
Universidad de Costa Rica Escuela de Trabajo Social, 1997.
AsociaciÛn de Trabajadoras DomÈsticas de
Costa Rica (ASTRODOMES). SituaciÛn del
oficio domÈstico: estudio por muestra, Costa Rica. San JosÈ: ASTRODOMES ñ
ConfederaciÛn Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Trabajadoras del Hogar
(CONLACTRAHO), 1997.
BaldÌ, Carlo Magno and Ericka Obando. La condiciÛn sociolaboral del migrante
nicarag¸ense en el sector construcciÛn. Lic. Trabajo Social, University of
Costa Rica, 1998.
Barboza, Francisco. La situaciÛn de la empleada domÈstica nicarag¸ense en San JosÈ, Costa Rica, 1997. MaestrÌa en Historia Centroamericana, Historia de las Mujeres en AmÈrica Latina, Universidad de Costa Rica, 1997.
Biesanz, Mavis Hiltunen, Richard Biesanz, and Karen Zubris Biesanz. The Ticos: Culture and Social Change in Costa Rica. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999.
Bourgois, Philippe I. Ethnicity at Work: Divided Labor on a Central American Banana Plantation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989.
Brysson, Maryse. Migraciones. . . øAlternativa Insolita? San JosÈ: Editorial
Departamento EcumÈnico de Investigaciones (DEI), 1997.
Camacho Nassar, Carlos. ìMiami en el
CorazÛn: IdeologÌas de Identidad en Costa Rica,î in AntropologÌa e identidades en CentroamÈrica, ed. Carmen Murillo
Chaverri, 133-138.Ý San JosÈ: Oficina de
Publicaciones de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 1996.
Campbell, Christopher P. Race, Myth, and the News. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, 1995.
Campos R., Domingo et al.Ý Democracia, Derechos Humanos y Cultura Politica en la Opinion de los Costarricenses (1989). San JosÈ: Insituto de Investigaciones PsicolÛgicas, 1990.
Castro Valverde, Carlos, and Abelardo
Morales Gamboa. La inserciÛn laboral de
la fuerza de trabajo nicarag¸ense en el sector de construcciÛn, la producciÛn
bananera y el servicio domÈstico en Costa Rica. San JosÈ: FLACSO, 1998.
Cersosimo, Gaetano. Los Estereotipos del Costarricense. San JosÈ: Editorial de la
Universidad de Costa Rica, 1978.
Donald Quiceno, Jessica Mac, Alejandro Poveda Mata, and Ester Serrano Madrigal. ìRelaciones Internacionales Conflictivas e Identidad Nacional: un estudio exploratorio en dos sectores de la poblaciÛn costarricense y un medio de difusiÛn escrita.î Lic. Psychology, University of Costa Rica, 1989.
GarcÌa, Alfonso, and Gilbert Guzm·n. Estudio de las condiciones de vida de los
migrantes nicarag¸enses en las fincas bananeras para orientar las polÌticas de
salud. San JosÈ: MaestrÌa en Salud P™blica, Universidad de Costa Rica,
1998.
Gonz·lez, Hugo C. and Julio Varela J. ìEl proceso de inmigraciÛn centroamericana dentro del actual proceso integracionista: su incidencia e impacto en la conservaciÛn y el desarrollo sustentable,î in La MigraciÛn Internacional: Su Impacto en CentroamÈrica, from the conference ìLas Migraciones Internacionales: Su Impacto en el Area Centroamericana,î May 28-30, 1992, Instituto de Estudios Sociales en PoblaciÛn (IDESPO), 46-57.Ý Costa Rica: privately printed, 1992.Ý
Greenwood
Arroyo, Marjorie, and Rosario Ruiz Oporta. Migrantes irregulares, estrategias de
sobrevivencia y derechos humanos: un estudio de casos. San JosÈ: Instituto Interamericano de Derechos
Humanos, 1995.
Hern·ndez Cruz, Omar, Eugenia Ibarra R.,
and Juan Rafael Quesada C.. DiscriminaciÛn
y racismo en la historia costarricense. San JosÈ: Editorial de la UCR,
1993.
Instituto Interamericano de Derechos
Humanos. El Derecho a Hablar y a Ser
Escuchadas, un aporte al Foro sobre Derechos Humanos, Refugiados, y Migraciones
en AmÈrica Central. San JosÈ: Oficina Regional del Alto Comisionado de las
Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados en Costa Rica, 1996.
Lehoucq,
Fabrice Edouard. ìLa Din·mica
PolÌtica Institucional y la ConstrucciÛn de un Regimen Democratico: Costa Rica
en perspectiva latinoamericana,î in Identidades
nacionales y Estado moderno en CentroamÈrica, ed. Arturo Taracena A. And
Jean Piel, 151-163. San JosÈ: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 1995.
Mesa Nacional PARinAC Costa Rica. RecopilaciÛn de documentos referentes a la situaciÛn de los derechos humanos de las personas migrantes en Costa Rica. San JosÈ: privately published, 1996-1997.
Meyer,
Heinrich and Frank Priess, eds. Radiografia de medios de comunicaciÛn en
Costa Rica: Opiniones y percepciones de periodistas. San JosÈ: Agencia Interamericana de
ComunicaciÛn, 1996.
Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social. Breve anl·lisis de la inmigraciÛn de
nicarag¸enses con fines de empleo hacia Costa Rica, ed. Oscar Vargas
Madrigal. San JosÈ: Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social, 1998.
Morales, Abelardo, and Carlos Castro. InmigraciÛn Laboral Nicarag¸ense en Costa
Rica. San JosÈ: FLACSO, 1999.
Morales Gamboa, Abelardo. AmnestÌa Migratoria en Costa Rica: An·lisis
de los alcances sociales y del impacto del RÈgimen de ExcepciÛn Migratoria para
los Inmigrantes de origen centroamericano en Costa Rica. San JosÈ: FLACSO,
1999.
Morales, Abelardo. Las fronteras desbordadas. Cuaderno de Ciencias Sociales no. 104.
San JosÈ: FLACSO, 1997.
Morales, Abelardo. Los territorios de cuajipal. Frontera y sociedad entre Nicaragua y
Costa Rica. San JosÈ: FLACSO, 1997.
Orozco, Manuel, Rodolfo de la Garz and
Miguel Barahona. InmigraciÛn y remesas
familiares. Cuaderno de Ciencias Sociales no. 98. San JosÈ: FLACSO, 1997.
Palacios GarcÌa, Alner. ìMigraciones e
Igualdad,î in La MigraciÛn Internacional:
Su Impacto en CentroamÈrica, from the conference ìLas Migraciones
Internacionales: Su Impacto en el Area Centroamericana,î May 28-30, 1992,
Instituto de Estudios Sociales en PoblaciÛn (IDESPO), 8-10. Costa Rica:
privately printed, 1992.Ý
Palmer, Steven.Ý ìHacia la ëauto-inmigraciÛní: El nacionalism oficial en Costa
Rica 1870-1930,î in Identidades
nacionales y Estado moderno en CentroamÈrica, ed. Arturo Taracena A. And
Jean Piel, 75-85. San JosÈ: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 1995.
Perceval, JosÈ Maria. Nacionalismos, xenofobia y racismo en la comunicaciÛn: Una perspectiva histÛrica. Barcelona: Novagr·fik, 1995.
Powell,
Lorein and Quince Duncan. TeorÌa y Pr·ctica del Racismo. San JosÈ: Departamento EcumÈnico de
Investigaciones, 1988.
Pries, Ludger. ìMigraciÛn laboral
internacional y espacios sociales transnacionales: bosquejo teÛrico-empÌrico,î
in MigraciÛn laboral internacional,
ed. MacÌas Gamboa y Fernando Herrera Lima, 1997.
Proyecto Estado de la NaciÛn en Desarrollo
Humano Sostenible. Estado de la naciÛn en
desarrollo humano sostenible: sexto informe 1999. San JosÈ: Proyecto Estado
de la NaciÛn, 2000.
Quesada Q., Carlos. ìFlujo migratorio de
Nicaragua a Costa Rica: Un problema al margen de la integraciÛn regional.î Brecha 16, no. 3 (1997): 8-9.
Quesada Quesada, Carlos, and ComisiÛn para
la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos en CentroamÈrica. Al sur del RÌo San Juan: DiagnÛstico sobre la situaciÛn de los Derechos
Humanos de los migrantes nicarag¸enses en Costa Rica. San JosÈ: CODEHUCA,
1998.
Samand™, Luis, Ricardo Pereira. Los nicarag¸enses en Costa Rica: enfoque de
una problem·tica. San JosÈ: ConsejerÌa en Proyectos para Refugiados
Latinoamericanos, 1996.
Sandoval GarcÌa, Carlos, ed. øCÛmo me siento en Costa Rica?
AutobiografÌas de nicarag¸enses. San JosÈ: Instituto de Investigaciones
Sociales, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales UCR, 2000.
Sandoval G., Carlos. ìComunicaciÛn y
etnicidad: ConstucciÛn de identidades entre costarricenses y nicarag¸enses en
los noventa.î Reflexiones 63 (1997)
29-39.
Simpson, George Eaton and J. Milton Yinger. Racial and Cultural Minorities: an analysis of prejudice and discrimination. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953.
Sosa, Roberto. ìNotas sobre migraciÛn
internacional en Nicaragua en la dÈcada del 80 y principios del 90,î in La MigraciÛn Internacional: Su Impacto en
CentroamÈrica, from the conference ìLas Migraciones Internacionales: Su
Impacto en el Area Centroamericana,î May 28-30, 1992, Instituto de Estudios
Sociales en PoblaciÛn (IDESPO), 32-45. Costa Rica: privately printed,
1992.Ý
Soto QuirÛs, Ronald. ìInmigraciÛn e identidad nacional en Costa Rica 1904-1942: Los ëotrosí reafirman el ënosotrosí.î Lic. History, University of Costa Rica, 1998.
Vargas V., JosÈÝ JoaquÌn. ìLa tarjeta de trabajo estacional y la polÌtica laboral
migratoria en Costa Rica.î Reflexiones
51 (1996) 45-51.
Wilson, Clint C. II and FÈlix GutiÈrrez. Race, Multiculturalism, and the Media: from mass to class communication. London: SAGE Publications, 1985.
[1] Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos. El Derecho a Hablar y a Ser Escuchadas, un aporte al Foro sobre Derechos Humanos, Refugiados, y Migraciones en AmÈrica Central. San JosÈ: Oficina Regional del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados en Costa Rica, 1996 (pages not numbered).Ý Translation mine. See also Sandoval 2000.
[2] Proyecto Estado de la NaciÛn en
Desarrollo Humano Sostenible 112.Ý
Translation mine.
[3]Ý
In 1997 this category amunted to some 15,000 naturalized citizens.Ý (Quesada and CODEHUCA 15)
[4] CID-Gallup polls conducted in Nicaragua regularly measureÝ unemployment with the question, ìHay alguien que vive en este hogar con usted o quiz·s usted mismo que busca empleo por 6 meses o m·s y no encuentra?îÝ Between 1997 and 1999, between 45% and 65% of respondents have said yes.
[5] CID-Gallup
Opinion Poll Nicaragua #32, April 2000. Twenty-seven percent of a nationally representative sample responded SÌ to
the question: ìEn el ™ltimo mes ha habido un momento en que no han tenido de
comer aquÌ en su hogar?î
[6] Calculated from number of households reporting a family member working in Costa Rica (35%) and the percentage of these saying they receive remittances (30%), as reported in CID-Gallup Opinion Poll Nicaragua #31, November 1999, 43-44. Rates of having a family member in Costa Rica and receiving remittances were similar to those reported in April 1999, CID-Gallup OP Nicaragua #30.Ý These remittances generally totaled less than $100 a month, indicating that sending a family member to work in Costa Rica is a coping mechanism, not a solution to poverty.
[7] Morales and Castro 14
[8] Carlos Quesada Q., ìFlujo migratorio de Nicaragua a Costa Rica: Un problema al margen de la integraciÛn regional,î Brecha 16, no. 3 (1997): 9. Philippe I. Bourgois, Ethnicity at Work: Divided Labor on a Central American Banana PlantationÝ (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989) 181.
[9] Gonz·lez (1992) notes that earlier migrants were concentrated largely in agricultural work, dispersed through the rural zones of Costa Rica.Ý This placed them geographically and socially at the perimeter of national consciousness.Ý More recently, however, more Nicaraguan immigrants have the capital city of San JosÈ as their destination, following the concentration of jobs in urban sectors as a result of larger historical processes.Ý Perhaps the greater visibility produced by this trend accounts for the relatively recent problematization of Nicaraguan immigration, for example:Ý ì[H]a sido a travÈs de las ™ltimas tres dÈcadas y, en especial, en la dÈcada actual que la corriente migratoria ha tomado proporciones considerables, hecho que ha motivado la firma de varios acuerdos binacionales entre los Estados de Costa Rica y Nicaragua.îÝÝ (Quesada and CODEHUCA, 1998: 5)
[10] Translation mine.Ý The original reads: ì[E]l ëasunto nicaí se ha convertido en una de las ëpreocupaciones permanentesí de la comunidad costarricense.î
[11] CID-Gallup Opinion Poll Costa Rica #80, released November 3 1999, 17. ìHay quienes dicen que el bono escolar se les debe dar solo a los niÒos costarricense, otros dicen que tambiÈn a los niÒos nicarag¸enses que estudian en el paÌs.Ý øUsted quÈ opina?î
[12] CID-Gallup Opinion Poll Costa Rica #80, released November 3 1999, 18.
[13] CID-Gallup Opinion Poll Costa Rica #79, Julio 1999, 31-32. ìAlgunos dicen que Costa Rica deberÌa permitir a todos los nicarag¸enses entrar y quedarse en el paÌs libremente, incluso despuÈs de la amnistÌa, otros dicen que no, que en el paÌs sÛlo pueden estar quienes se encuentran de manera legal, que se deben echar a los ilegales del paÌs, otros dicen que se deben echar a todos los nicarag¸enses.Ý øUsted que opina?î
[14] CID-Gallup Opinion Poll Costa Rica #78, released April, 1999.
[15] CID-Gallup Opinion Poll Nicaragua #31, November 1999, 43-44. ìQuÈ tipo de trato ha recibido ese familiar de los costarricenses?î Response options included muy bueno, algo bueno, algo malo, and muy malo.
[16] Consult the bibliography for examples.
[17] Carlos Sandoval G.,Ý ìComunicaciÛn y etnicidad: ConstucciÛn de
identidades entre costarricenses y nicarag¸enses en los noventa,î Reflexiones 63 (1997) 29-39.
[18] These barrios
marginales, or precarios, were:
Carpio en San JosÈ, Los Diques y Los Llanos de Santa LucÌa en Cartago.Ý All can be considered as part of the San
Jose greater metropolitan area.
[19] Costa Ricaís central valley region includes the capital city and between one third and one half of the national population.Ý Over the countryís history, residents of this region have tended to be whiter, wealthier, and more powerful socially and politically than residents of outlying provinces.
[20] Abelardo Morales and Carlos Castro, InmigraciÛn Laboral Nicarag¸ense en Costa Rica (San JosÈ: FLACSO, 1999) 130.
[21] Nicaraguans, in turn, speak of Costa Ricans as ìsissyî or gay. Ibid.
[22] Domingo Campos R., et al, Democracia, Derechos Humanos y Cultura Politica en la Opinion de los Costarricenses (1989) Ý(San JosÈ: Insituto de Investigaciones PsicolÛgicas, 1990) 38.
[23] Bourgois 203
[24] In fact, government statistics indicate that Nicaraguan citizens are responsible for 3 to 4% of crimes committed in Costa Rica, according to an article by Giannina Segnini, ìNicarag¸enses impactan salud,î La NaciÛn, Tuesday, December 7, 1999.Ý This is less than the proportion of the general population Nicaraguans are believed to compose.
[25] Mesa Nacional PARinAC Costa Rica, RecopilaciÛn de documentos referentes a la
situaciÛn de los derechos humanos de las personas migrantes en Costa Rica
(San JosÈ: privately published, 1996-1997) 39, citing the work of Randall
Blanco et al, Inventario-DiagnÛstico
sobre programas y proyectos que se ejecutan hacia las poblaciones meta del
GRUCAN (San JosÈ, 1995). Translation mine.
[26] Carlos Quesada Quesada and ComisiÛn para
la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos en CentroamÈrica, Al sur del RÌo San Juan: DiagnÛstico sobre la situaciÛn de los Derechos
Humanos de los migrantes nicarag¸enses en Costa Rica (San JosÈ: CODEHUCA,
1998) 5. Translation mine.
[27] ìNicaî is short for ìnicaraguense,î and may be used as either a noun (a Nicaraguan person) or as an adjective.Ý In Nicaragua, the word carries strongly positive connotations, and is a self-applied term of pride commonly used in everyday speech.Ý Among Costa Ricans, the term has strong negative connotations and, if used, should be taken as an ins