Introduction

They should not stop fighting for their dreams, because what one dreams of, what one wants, is the American dream. (Ruth, 20 years old, Honduras, personal communication, May 6, 2018).

Irregular migration types have not shown significant changes for decades, as they continue to be tied to structural determinants in both countries of origin (social inequality, unemployment, and economic, political and/or social uncertainty) and destination countries (cheap and flexible labor) (^{Bloch, & Chimienti, 2011}). According to ^{Castles’ definition (2010}, p. 15), “irregular migration” occurs when a person enters or inhabits a country of which they are not a citizen in violation of its migration regulations. In the words of the same author, there are no reliable estimates regarding global irregular migration statistics, but the ILO estimates that 15% of migration movements are irregular.

In 2015 (the relevant year for this study), the UN estimated that almost 15% of the planet’s inhabitants lived in a place other than the one in which they were born. In 2020, this figure was updated to 272 million migrants in the world, of which 48% were women and 13.9% were children. Mexico and the United States make up the largest migratory corridor in the world, as the latter hosts 2 out of every 10 international migrants (^{Caicedo, & Morales Mena, 2015}), especially from the so-called Northern Triangle of Central America:

Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador are countries where poverty and violence prompt a climate that encourages their inhabitants to seek better living conditions outside their borders. According to Human Rights Watch, these countries have a rate of 53 murders a day, more than three times the world average [...] These types of conditions [...] are the main causes of the exodus experienced by these countries (^{Anguiano, 2016}, paras. 13-14).

Despite the fact that media such as newscasts and newspapers disseminate information about the insecurity and risks faced by Central American migrants as they pass through Mexico, and anti-immigration policies and other programs, some studies show that attempts to cross into either country have not significantly decreased. To ^{Cornelius (2001}, p. 677), this is consistent with previous generations of Mexicans attempting to cross the border: “In fact, most migrants are not giving up after their first, second, third, fourth, or even fifth apprehension [...] they just keep trying to enter until they succeed.”

^{Hernández (2016}, p. 69) asserts how studies of the risks of Central American migration in Mexico have evolved, from first identifying the crossing of jungles or deserts to train accidents, rape and mistreatment at migratory stations or labor abuses; the current concern focuses on the safety threat posed by kidnapping, extortion, sexual abuse and murder at the hands of organized crime. ^{Caicedo, and Morales Mena (2015}) claim that in 2014 the U.S.-Mexico border was the third deadliest border crossing in the world, after Africa and the Mediterranean Sea.

These same difficulties have caused Mexico to become a destination and not only a transit country for some Central Americans in recent years (^{Anguiano, 2016}). One of the cities that increasingly hosts more migrants from the Northern Triangle is precisely Monterrey, the place of study in this article. This metropolitan area is the third most populated in Mexico and the largest in the states bordering the United States. It is highly industrialized and, therefore, promises employment opportunities, albeit informal, for irregular migrants (^{García, 2016}).

A phenomenon that began to occur in 2018 was the migrant caravans from Honduras and Guatemala. Thousands of migrants got organized to cross through Mexico and get to the United States as a group (^{Ahmed, & Dickerson, 2018}). While this was not the way most interviewees traveled, it is possible to infer that these movements motivated more people to attempt to cross into the United States, as they felt greater safety in doing so this way. This is more evident when it comes to Central American migrants who do not have the information, means or resources to do so on their own.

In the first place, the objective of this study was to determine what information Central American migrants had in order to make their journey to whichever country was their destination. To this end, we explored the imaginaries about the course and their final destination, and analyzed the sources of information that contributed to the different elements of the imaginaries described. We also addressed the updates-that is, all the mutations that the imaginaries underwent due to new information they received-from the moment of departure, during their passage through Mexico, until they were in Monterrey, where the interviews were carried out.

Beyond merely contributing to the field of knowledge on migration in Mexico, this study contributes to communication sciences, since the role of information sources in the decision- making process of Central American migrants is paramount to understanding the risks they are willing to face to reach their destination. In addition, the configuration of their imaginaries regarding the final destination is highly influenced by the media (newscasts, soap operas, fiction programs and movies), as well as by interpersonal sources (family, friends and other migrants) with whom they interact in person or through sociodigital networks. To a lesser extent, there are intrapersonal sources, whose information is formed by the migrant’s own experiences in previous attempts.

It is worthwhile noting that the interviews were conducted to people who decided to embark on the journey despite the imaginaries and/or information they had. Therefore, it is not possible to identify the effect that the negative campaigns or representations of migration may have had on people who were discouraged by these narratives.

Imaginaries and sources of information

Imaginaries are discursive structures that affect the subject’s understanding of themselves, their practices and their roles in society (^{González-Vélez, 2002}). ^{Castoriadis discussed in La institución imaginaria de la sociedad (2007}) the concept of social imaginaries as the result of social constructs that give meaning to reality and to themselves, through these imaginaries that are shared as a community. They require a set of meanings that are sometimes institutionalized and regulate culture. As stated by ^{García-Muñoz, and Gómez-Gallego (2021}), social imaginaries are more than images or ideas and coherently motivate social action.

In the context of migration, the motivations for crossing borders have to do with the way of imagining other places and lives. While it is important to note that this group usually overestimates the economic opportunities and quality of life in the destination country (^{Salazar, 2012}), that is to say, the expectation they have about their life once they settle in the United States or Mexico is to have a higher standard of living for people in their conditions as irregular migrants, or in the case of Mexico, higher than the average of the population, or at least, than that of their life in their country of origin. According to ^{Arboleda-Ariza et al., (2020}), “social imaginaries, as well as social memory, are domains of the possible that facilitate collective action” (p. 9). This suggests that imaginaries and decision making are broadly linked, which would explain the pursuit of the “American dream.” To ^{García-Muñoz, and Gómez-Gallego (2021}), social imaginaries “are an explanatory construct of social phenomena and a hermeneutic tool to interpret the meanings that subjects experience” (p. 220).

This contributes to the fact that Central Americans, despite being aware of the dangers they will face along the way, decide to undertake the journey anyway, even if they have already experienced these risks on previous journeys. Such a phenomenon is consistent with ^{Vigh’s findings (2009}) in his studies of migration from Africa. The author found that migrants from Africa see a promise of social progress in other countries, in a way that is almost discriminatory of their own countries of origin. They consider that in European countries there is a better organizational capacity and possibilities for their own social positioning than where they grew up, because these are amateur countries when it comes to society. Therefore, they are highly motivated to migrate despite the dangers they may face along the way.

The imaginary of the American dream “is defined as those expectations, conditions and situations expected, imagined or referred to by potential migrants or returnees with regard to the U.S.” (^{Chacón et al., 2016}, p. 266). In this sense, the social imaginary is key to anticipate the social scenarios where the migrant’s life will develop (^{Vigh, 2009}). This dream is built on the hope of solving for themselves the social problems faced by migrants in their country of origin, such as the need to find a better job to support their family, reunite with their relatives in the United States or escape violence (^{International Crisis Group, 2016}).

The U.S. government, since Barack Obama’s administration (2009-2017), revealed an increase in irregular migration by Central Americans. In conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), they launched an information campaign that highlighted the dangers migrants may face when making this journey, as well as a joint effort with Mexico to have stronger migration measures on the southern border (^{Hiskey et al., 2016}). However, findings on the results of these measures show that they are flawed, as migrants consider that they are already at a disadvantage in their own countries. This indicates that they already know the risks, but consider that there are possibilities for improvement and well-being by overcoming them (Hiskey et al., 2016; ^{Alpes, & Sørensen, 2015}).

^{Inzunza (2017}) asserts that imaginaries are made up of three types of information sources: intrapersonal, interpersonal and mass. The intrapersonal source refers to the individual’s experiences, so that they obtain first-hand information about an event or situation. Interpersonal sources are interactions with other individuals, who in this case are usually returnees, other migrants who are already at their destination or who are on the way, as well as other information agents such as public institutions, civil associations (shelters) or other people who contribute to the imaginaries. This information can be obtained directly (in conversations) or indirectly (sociodigital network posts). Finally, there are mass sources, that is, mass media such as television, cinema, journalistic sources, advertising or propaganda campaigns, among others, both in fiction and non-fiction formats.

According to ^{Chacón et al., (2016}), migrants gather information from two sources: the media and returnees. Both tend to idealize the destination country, as returnees’ stories speak with a triumphalist discourse that contributes to romanticize the American (or Mexican) dream.

Nevertheless, not only returnees constitute this source of interpersonal information. Immigrants, for example, from their sociodigital networks contribute with photographs that promote displacement (^{Belloni, 2016}). This is consistent with studies that analyze the effects of sociodigital networks on users. A recurrent example is the comparison migrants make of themselves in relation to other users, whom they envy for the lifestyle they have achieved (^{Krasnova et al., 2013}), which motivates uninformed decisions based on appealing perceptions that turn out to be wrong, and advice to potential migrants on ways to cross (^{Dekker, & Engbersen, 2014}). Additionally, migrant networks work as points of contact that support both financially and with information about transiting Mexico and crossing the border (^{Canales et al., 2019}).

Regarding the media, ^{Salazar (2012}) points out that American popular fiction often represents a utopian life of wealth and perseverance. ^{Kamalipour (1999}) has claimed for decades that the world contains images that are consciously manipulated or created to generate a status or identity to promote, among other things, some nations. To him, no other country has more power in terms of reach and penetration in culture than the United States, and he attributes the McDonaldization of the global village to this phenomenon; as a result, the process of globalization, as part of a process of progress in the world, is understood as synonymous with Americanization.

More precisely, ^{Bakewell, and Jolivet (2015}) suggest that narratives speaking of migration motivate or spark interest in migrating. ^{Martínez-Zalce (2017}) gives an account of the figure of the migrant in cinema, where they are characterized by their vulnerability. Films such as El Norte (^{Nava, 1983}), La bestia (^{Kuttikatt et al., 2020}), Sin nombre (^{Fukunaga, 2009}) and La jaula de oro (^{Quemada-Diez, 2013}) show the perilous journey faced by Central Americans in their transit through Mexico, and mostly conclude that the American dream is unattainable. While this vision is relatively fatalistic, it is worthwhile noting that Mexican soap operas and cinema do illustrate a life of many possibilities in Mexico, as they use American-formula narratives with a message suggesting that those who work consistently and long hours will achieve wealth.

It is important to consider, however, that even when migrants have some information regarding their journey, their knowledge remains insufficient or inaccurate. ^{Llanes, and Ghys (2021}) assert that migrants are unaware of their rights even though they can exercise them in Mexico, for example, access to public health care. This may be due to their self-perception as illegal or undocumented, as these terms (and the roles they self-assume) fuel anxiety and fear among migrants (^{Willen, 2007}), and they choose not to seek support from public institutions for fear of being deported.

^{Alpes, and Sørensen (2015)} actually maintain that to migrants it is not so much the information about dangers that weighs on their decisions, but the trust they have in this information. ^{Inzunza (2017}) names two primary elements to determine the role played by information sources in the construction of imaginaries: credibility and frequency. Credibility, on the one hand, responds to what Alpes, and Sørensen mentioned, and is important because migrants do discriminate information both in their country of origin and in transit. On the other hand, frequency has to do with the access migrants may have to this source in their country of origin and on their journey. In the absence of other sources, this access can largely determine whether or not there will be trust in the information received. In general, migrant shelters usually offer access to some media such as television and radio, or allow Internet connection; but not all migrants make use of these media, nor are they interested in doing so.

In addition, ^{Inzunza (2017}) considers one's own experiences as a source of intrapersonal information. Here we would particularly have to take into account immigrants who are repeating the journey, either for reasons of deportation, voluntary return or to bring their family with them (among the people interviewed, three had come to Mexico only and 12 had managed to cross or live in the United States). To this end, it is pertinent to reflect on what ^{Arboleda-Ariza et al., (2020}) propose to relate the concepts of social memory, social imaginary and horizons of expectation, terms that are relevant to this research. These authors place

memory as a human product that is enunciated from a present-past that can be affected and traversed by the innumerable networks of meaning from which it is enunciated, as well as by the institutional forms acquired by the presumed hierarchies expressing it. In turn, the analytical proposal also includes that a horizon of expectation is equally impacted by the assumption of a condition of constant mutability of memory projected into the present-future (p. 15).

This literature review allows us to reflect on the data obtained through the interviews from the perspective of sociology and information sciences. On the one hand, it is essential to recognize the dynamics of this phenomenon that has occurred for decades and that, despite political attempts to reduce transit to Mexico and the United States, no significant change has been achieved. Beyond taking a stance in the debate on what effect each information source has on the migrant’s decision making, we seek to recognize the imaginaries: how they are formed and what is the information that the Central American migrant has from their places of origin.

Studying from the perspective of the imaginaries of active migrants makes it possible to identify the information sources they have, not only from their origin but also those that they have collected along their journey. By interviewing migrants who have made quite progress in their path and are so close to the border, it is possible to have an idea of the transformations that their imaginary has undergone along the way, and how their experiences have contributed to these changes. Another benefit of studying migrants who have not yet reached their destination (at least not the one they initially planned) is that it tells a story that is still in process, and thus eliminates the bias of success. Frank-Vitale (2020) clearly indicates that the in-transit story sounds different from a story told by migrants after they have succeeded (p. 70).

Method

The fieldwork was conducted from a qualitative perspective, applying the focused interview technique. These interviews were carried out in a migrant shelter from April 2017 to May 2018. A total of 60 interviews were obtained, which were audio recorded and subsequently transcribed for analysis through NVivo software.

The interview guide consisted of an introductory section that collected demographic information and push-pull factors;³ followed by questions about imaginaries and information sources in three stages: when leaving home, in transit, and at the time of the interview (conducted in the city of Monterrey). In the closing section, they were asked about their contact with their city of origin, their imaginaries about their country, if they talked to other migrants and if they were aware of the political situation in the United States.⁴

The participant profile is characterized as follows: 45 out of 60 interviewees are men (75%); the average age is 29 years old, with the youngest being 18 and the oldest 55; most come from Honduras (44/60), while the rest are originally from Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua. Regarding their educational level, 21 of them finished elementary school, while 12 dropped out before reaching the third grade. Only four finished a technical career and five finished high school. Of the participants, 45 are making the journey for the first time (75%), while 15 had previously come to Mexico, and of these, 12 made it to the United States. The average length of the interview was 37 minutes, with the shortest being 15 minutes and the longest 98 minutes.

One of the advantages of this profile is that, since they are transmigrants, it is possible to have an acceptable degree of memory of their imaginary upon leaving their country, as well as of the updates and changes that occurred during their journey. Likewise, with the exception of returns (12), the imaginaries of the final destination are still free of personal experience, which makes it possible to identify the role of interpersonal and media information sources.

On the other hand, the limitations to be considered have to do with the circumstances in which the interviews were carried out, since for security reasons they were not conducted in private rooms, but in the courtyard of the shelter or in social areas. This could have affected the rapport expressed by the participants in terms of their openness, trust, honesty and desire to share their imaginary, opinion or experiences. Although it was explained to them before starting the recordings that a confidentiality agreement would be maintained and that they could choose their own pseudonym, some of the participants who suffered from persecution, mistreatment or were victims of crime were distrustful of the project. Even when it was stated that their stay in the shelter would not be affected by refusing the interview, many of them decided to participate even though they were noticeably unwilling to do so.

Results

Interviewer: And what did you hear from the United States?

Luis Carlos: The land of dreams. (Luis Carlos, 29 years old, Guatemala, first attempt, personal communication, April 28, 2018).

The analysis of results will be presented in two subsections: imaginaries and information on the course and the final destination. Each section will also address the sources of information mentioned by the participants, which influenced their decision making about the route, transportation, destination, among others.

Conclusions

First, it is possible to conclude that migrants in general have a limited amount of information about both the destination and the journey, particularly information coming from official sources, even when it is not their first time migrating. The process that follows the Central American’s decision to migrate to Mexico or the United States does not consider in-depth research of ways, transportation or lodging. In other words, when asked how they chose their next destination or how they arrived, it could be perceived that their answers were very improvised.

Second, the information and imaginaries they have are distorted. There is a lot of romanticized talk about the destination and the perceived risks are also minimized. What is not known about this finding is the reason for this distortion. A proposed hypothesis is that there is manipulation by polleros or coyotes, who instill fear to attract more clients to their services, instead of using traditional or public means such as buses for transportation, shelters for lodging, or public health and safety services. Evidently, the high risks to their health and/or life is not disregarded, but some migrants said that their experience through the use of commercial, legal or institutional means was safer and more reliable than those who paid high sums of money (higher than the former) to use illegal means of transit.

Consistent with the literature, the types of sources that feed their imaginaries and decision making are interpersonal (either other migrants in the destination country or in transit, returnees and other figures at different points in their journey), media (both in fiction and non-fiction formats); and in the case of those who attempt for the second, third or more times to migrate either to Mexico or the United States, intrapersonal (^{Inzunza, 2017}; ^{Chacón et al., 2016}).

In terms of the elements noted by ^{Inzunza (2017}) on information sources, it is concluded that some media play a relevant role in the construction of the imaginary about the destination country, as they are constantly used as references to describe the cities where they plan to settle. This is due to the fact that shows and fiction movies are accessible sources, whose contents are present throughout their lives, from their childhood or youth. However, in terms of credibility, more emphasis is placed on the use of newscasts and the Internet, since they use these media to identify both the risks they face in their transit through Mexico, as well as to know the route, among others.

From this analysis of the use of information sources, it is concluded that fictional narratives contribute to the imaginaries in terms of images, while newscasts and the Internet provide useful information.

On the other hand, interpersonal sources are used more when there is contact with a returnee or a migrant who has already managed to settle in the destination country; as well as in transit through Mexico when meeting other migrants along the way. In this case, given the circumstances of not having access to the media, interpersonal sources become the only ones accessible, although they are not always trusted by the migrant. Participants frequently expressed that they only believe in other people when, intuitively, they appear to be trustworthy. In this sense, although migrants demonstrate the ability to discriminate information, on many occasions they judge by the convenience of whether or not it contributes to achieving their American dream, and it does not depend precisely on critical thinking but, as mentioned above, on intuitive thinking, as noted by Alpes, and Sørensen (2015). Certainly, it cannot be ignored that, for many, in the first place there are more push factors. That is, they feel pressured or forced to leave their country, so the first motivation is to emigrate, while the decision of where to migrate is motivated by the American- or Mexican-dream.

In this sense, it is observed that the imaginaries are shaped by television and film fiction content with a positive tone, and in the case of those who use sociodigital networks (mainly Facebook or WhatsApp), by the images they see of their contacts through these applications. For the purposes of shaping the imaginary, information from sociodigital networks is also considered glorified in that they are the filtered product that the user consciously decides to publish for others to see that aspect of their life, regardless of whether it is accurate, true or precise. While ^{Krasnova et al., (2013}) mention some alarming consequences of the effects of sociodigital networks on their users, it is necessary to pay attention when individuals use these images to make a decision that involves risking their own lives to reach a target destination in the United States or Mexico, and that is why it is pertinent to investigate the sources of information used by Central American migrants. In this line of thought, cultural studies should place emphasis on the concept of active audiences proposed by ^{Hall (2001}), which sustains that the viewer not only passively receives information from the media, but also interprets it using their mediations (ideologies, beliefs, attitudes and previous knowledge, among others). This could explain one of the reasons why the anti-immigration campaigns do not have the expected effect on the people interviewed, since together with the Hollywood media narratives, they are left behind and discriminated against by their demotivating messages.

It is proven through these interviews that migrants do consume information about negative issues (Trump’s international policies, dangers, etc.). The question that could be raised in future research is why they opt for a romanticized imaginary to make their decision: on the one hand, it is assumed that this is what they want to believe in order to achieve their aspirations, but on the other, it would also be necessary to evaluate how much they need to believe this imaginary to justify having left their homes-either for economic or safety grounds-. Several participants accept the negative because they believe that they will be able to avoid it by making the right decisions or even by adhering faithfully to their religious beliefs.

Another important finding is that, regardless of whether the motive for migrating is violence or poverty-driven, the American-or Mexican-dream is described in economic terms (i.e., there is no talk of less crime or organized crime in the United States). This shows that, while the push factors in their country are often related to threats or violence due to organized crime, the pull factors in the destination country are, in all cases in this study, linked to economic stability, employment, earnings or acquisition of material goods. This further confirms what ^{Salazar (2012}) indicates, since many of the migrants have the (over)expectation of finding a solution to all their problems once they arrive in the United States. Many even express the expectation of finding a partner to settle down and have a family. In this case, it is interesting to quote Arturo, who in discriminatory terms towards his own ethnicity (consistent with ^{Vigh’s findings [2009}]), is looking for a woman with an American phenotype. Romantic discourses about the American dream transcend into how to succeed in mingling in the target societies as members of local families.

In line with ^{Llanes, and Ghys (2021}), there are certain differences with the group studied, since mention was made of official sources such as the Human Rights Commission, the Red Cross or the migrant shelters themselves, whose information is greatly trusted by many. It is important to remember that, as a limitation for this conclusion, only people inside a shelter were interviewed, and therefore the perception of migrants who do not go to these types of institutions is unknown.

Another relevant topic for future articles and studies is to know in greater depth the role played by religion, since the people interviewed frequently raised it to express how they made their decisions. It is suggested that this is a determining factor in the decision to emigrate and how to do so, since it is part of the individual mediations of migrants in their way of understanding and interpreting reality. In addition, it is urgent for the research agenda to identify the information disseminated by polleros or criminal groups, and to observe how much it influences the imaginaries that Central Americans have in their transit through Mexico.

Translation: Paola Salinas.