I'm not posting a link to that POS site. The article link is on the front page.
What is ironic is that both sides of the illegal immigration issue feel the media is against them.

Fair and Unbalanced?

Immigration has become the media’s new favorite topic, and practically every news outlet is itching to find new angles on immigrants and their impact on the country, positive or negative.

But sometimes the media can get carried away with sensationalism to sell more issues or attract more viewers. And in some cases, interest groups who seek to promote their own agenda find it all too easy to (mis)use the media to their advantage. When is it fair and balanced journalism and when does it cross the line into just plain irresponsible?

Simple Math?

Some of the country’s leading news organizations have recently given attention to a study conducted by a researcher at the Violent Crimes Institute in Atlanta. Deborah Schurman-Kauflin analyzed 1,500 cases of serial rape, serial murder, sexual homicides and child molestation committed by illegal immigrants over a 7-year period ending in 2006. She found that the 1,500 offenders in her study had a total of 5,999 victims, an average of four victims each. She also found that the majority of the undocumented sex offenders were located in states with a high concentration of immigrants, including California, Texas, New York, New Jersey and Florida. And according to public records, she says, 2% of all illegal immigrants that are apprehended are found to be sex offenders.

Schurman-Kauflin then made the following assumptions about the general undocumented population that are now being exploited by the media:

Sex offenders among the undocumented make up a higher percentage than offenders in the general population because there are said to be more illegal men than women.
If about 2% of all illegal immigrants apprehended are found to have records as sex offenders, and there are an estimated 12 million undocumented, then there are at least 240,000 sex offenders currently in the country illegally. And “93 sex offenders and 12 serial sexual offenders coming across U.S. borders illegally per day," she says.
Since the sex offenders in her study averaged out to having four victims each, the estimated 240,000 undocumented sex offenders could potentially have 960,000 victims.
Illegal immigrants gradually commit worse crimes because repeat offenders analyzed become more violent with each assault.
Are these fair assumptions? Or is she just misusing statistics to create fear and hatred toward undocumented immigrants? Or is the media taking this bait because of their own bias or the competition for ratings?

Another Way to Look at It:

As presented by the media, Schurman-Kauflin’s “findings” make illegal immigrants seem much more criminal and ominous than other immigrants and other Americans. But is this really true? Does illegal status make a person more likely to commit a sexual or violent crime?

Upon closer inspection, Schurman-Kauflin’s data fails to prove, or even suggest that undocumented males have any greater incidence of any of the criminal behavior studied than any other U.S. male. And there are also no federal statistics that prove that is true. In truth, the only variable shared by all the subjects proven to increase their likelihood to be sexual or violent criminals was not their status as illegals, but their status as males.

Furthermore, FBI arrest data, court conviction data and prison admissions data tell us what we do know about the typical sex offender in the United States: he is almost always male, in his early 30s and white. This profile doesn’t match that of the typical illegal immigrant, who is generally in his 20s and brown. Who Says?

The media can have a tremendous impact on shaping the public’s opinion and some journalists in particular already have a reputation for trying to sway people in one direction or another. CNN’s Lou Dobbs came under fire from advocacy groups, and even other members of the media, for his anti-immigrant stance, which in some cases bordered on one-sided journalism.

The public should always ask: who says?

Many news organizations present studies conducted by partisan sources and organizations, which are sometimes based on facts and sometimes based on assumptions, and fail to show the other side of the argument. Though the media is supposed to act as an independent source of information, some news organizations promote certain liberal or conservative views and even express their support for one candidate or another during presidential campaigns.

When is it fair and balanced journalism and when does it cross the line into being just plain irresponsible? Who do you trust?