What Immigration Journalism Reveals About the Erosion of Impact in Objective Reporting

This week, our CEO Tianna Mañón joined a powerful panel of journalists from some of the nation’s top newsrooms to discuss immigration, ICE, and the evolving state of journalism—particularly in Los Angeles, where communities are being deeply affected by increased surveillance and targeted raids. The conversation, hosted as part of a corporate journalism initiative, centered not only on ethics in reporting but on power: who holds it, who shapes it, and whether journalism still has the impact it once did.

Tianna brought her expertise on media systems, narrative equity, and public trust to the conversation, arguing a provocative but necessary point: the current model of “objective journalism” no longer carries the weight we’ve been taught to believe it does.

The Shift: When Truth Alone Isn’t Enough

For decades, journalism clung tightly to the idea of objectivity—presenting both sides, letting the facts speak for themselves. But in an era where AI-generated misinformation, algorithmic manipulation, gerrymandered districts, and felony disenfranchisement reshape the political landscape, “just the facts” doesn’t cut through the noise.

Yes, the Voting Rights Act gave Americans the legal right to vote. But what good is a legal right when that right is eroded by voter suppression tactics, disinformation campaigns, and billion-dollar political ad buys? The same question must now be asked of journalism: What good is objective reporting if it doesn't move people? If the truth is drowned out before it even reaches the public?

Why Immigration Reporting Matters Now

In cities like Los Angeles, immigration is not a political talking point—it’s a lived reality. Raids, deportations, and surveillance disproportionately affect Black and Brown immigrant communities. Yet the journalism that covers these realities is often stripped of emotional weight, sanitized for neutrality, or buried beneath political headlines.

Tianna challenged this norm. She pointed out that, with the waning reach of U.S. political systems globally and trust in national institutions declining, journalism must pivot. It must choose to serve the public good—not by avoiding bias, but by naming harm, naming power, and centering the lived experience of those most impacted.

Journalism as a Tool—Not a Passive Observer

As Tianna emphasized during the panel, journalism is not—and never has been—neutral. It’s a tool. And like any tool, its impact depends on how it’s used.

Objective journalism can still be valuable. But it must evolve. It must understand that systems of oppression are not "debates" to be presented in balance. They are realities to be exposed. Especially when it comes to life-altering topics like immigration, where the difference between silence and storytelling can mean safety or deportation.

At Mañón Media Management, We’re Choosing Impact

At MMM, we’re deeply proud to have Tianna bring this clarity and urgency to national conversations. We don’t believe in neutrality for neutrality’s sake. We believe in visibility, truth, and accountability. And we’re committed to helping organizations and leaders use media not just to exist—but to change things.

Because the facts alone aren't enough anymore. Not when truth can be so easily buried under influence. What matters now is the courage to name what’s happening—and the skill to say it in a way that still cuts through.