Shockwaves Across Borders: When U.S. Propaganda Lands on Mexican Screens
On a recent Sunday, as Mexican families gathered to watch the Liga MX soccer finals—a moment of national unity and joy—their screens flickered with something far less celebratory. Startling images replaced the usual commercial break: men in handcuffs being marched into police cars, grainy footage of border crossings at the Rio Grande, a foreboding bag of white powder, and a parade of mugshots—mostly Latino, Black, and Asian faces. The message was as clear as it was chilling: if you cross into the United States without documentation, “we will hunt you down.”
These ads, paid for by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and prominently featuring U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, weren’t just another political export; they represented a direct affront to the dignity of Mexican viewers and the sovereignty of their nation. Or so argued President Claudia Sheinbaum, who swiftly condemned the spots as discriminatory, dehumanizing, and—most crucially—potentially in violation of the Mexican Constitution’s guarantees of equality and dignity.
Perhaps it’s no surprise that this TV blitz during high-profile national broadcasts drew a cascade of outrage. It’s not just political theater; it’s a battle over who gets to control the narrative of migration, and whose stories get to be told. According to the federal anti-discrimination council (CONAPRED), such content risks transforming the airwaves into a stage that normalizes hatred, violence, and exclusion. “There is no place for this kind of messaging in a society that values human rights,” says University of Mexico legal scholar Dr. Mariana Torres. “Media has immense power to shape attitudes and justify policy—often with very real consequences for the vulnerable.”
The Political Backdrop: Sovereignty, Rights, and Reforms
Lurking behind this controversy is a larger struggle over Mexico’s sovereignty and the role of foreign influence in shaping domestic discourse. The ad campaign, part of a multimillion-dollar effort aligned with Trump-era migration crackdowns, comes at a time when the U.S.-Mexico relationship is already strained under the weight of border surges, drug interdiction pressures, and political grandstanding on both sides.
According to a recent Pew Research Center survey, the vast majority of Mexicans view U.S. immigration policy as unjustly punitive, and a full two-thirds reject the idea that American politicians should use Mexican media to deliver their warnings. It’s not just a theoretical issue: these ads aired during events with some of Mexico’s largest, most emotionally charged TV audiences. The soccer league broadcasts, in particular, are moments during which families share living rooms and collective memory is made—the very worst time, many argue, to inject toxic, xenophobic propaganda.
This is not only about migration—it’s about respecting the dignity of our people and our nation. We will not allow Mexico to be treated as a billboard for foreign governments’ fears and prejudices.
– President Claudia Sheinbaum
It’s worth recalling that until 2014, Mexican law forbade foreign governments from purchasing political or ideological ad space on national television and radio—a reflection of Mexico’s hard-won independence in the information age. That restriction was quietly lifted, opening the door for foreign-sponsored political content. What’s unfolding now is, in many ways, a broad reckoning with that decision. President Sheinbaum’s proposal is straightforward: restore the ban, limiting foreign spots to genuine cultural and tourism information, and shield Mexican airwaves from what she calls “propaganda campaigns” designed to sow fear and division.
Miguel Ángel Estrada, an attorney specializing in media law, points out, “The decision in 2014 was framed as a modernization effort, but it failed to anticipate how political polarization abroad could be imported into our living rooms, our language, and our democratic debates.”
The Human Impact: Criminalizing Migration and Its Repercussions
Beyond government press releases and diplomatic skirmishes lies a more personal and urgent reality—the daily lives of migrants and the larger Mexican public. When images of non-white men in handcuffs are blasted across the nation’s screens and migration is equated with criminality, what message is being sent?
Human rights experts and social psychologists warn about the “othering” effect: these campaigns do not reduce migration but instead escalate xenophobia, normalize racial profiling, and create fertile soil for anti-migrant violence. CONAPRED’s invocation of Articles 2, 223, and 256 of Mexican law wasn’t academic—it was a demand rooted in the basic acknowledgment that words (and images) matter. Article 2, for example, sets forth broad anti-discrimination protections; Article 256 prohibits incitement to violence and hate against identifiable groups. That’s not something to take lightly.
According to Dr. Sandra Jimenez, who has counseled families at the Central Migrant Shelter in Mexico City, “When television, the most powerful medium in rural areas, repeatedly shows migrants as criminals, it corrodes the community’s empathy and lays the groundwork for exclusion or even violence. The people who knock on our shelter doors already carry trauma; this kind of messaging amplifies it.”
A closer look reveals how public policy isn’t developed in a vacuum. Researchers at Harvard and the Migration Policy Institute have documented that harsh anti-immigrant messaging does little to curb migration flows but reliably stirs anti-immigrant sentiment in host communities. Mexican policymakers now face not just a question of media ethics but of public trust, human rights, and social cohesion.
What does it say about a democracy when ads sponsored by a foreign government threaten, belittle, and dehumanize entire groups of people inside your own country? Though President Sheinbaum is clear in her condemnation, this controversy is a stark reminder of how fragile dignity and sovereignty can be in a hyperconnected world. The choice facing Mexico’s lawmakers now is whether to reclaim the public airwaves—or cede them to the highest foreign bidder.
