Do regional media discourses concerning immigration influence how street-level bureaucrats provide welfare services to immigrants? While prior research has established a link between national media reporting and inequality in administrative decisions, little is known about how regional variation in media coverage affects the treatment of ethnic minority welfare recipients. Drawing on bureaucratic discrimination and media framing literatures, I argue that immigration discourses in regional newspapers influence the decision-making of street-level bureaucrats. These discourses shape their perceptions of regional immigration challenges (or achievements). Consequently, bureaucrats adopt stricter (or more lenient) decision-making approaches toward clients with a migration background.

To examine this relationship, I leverage a novel dataset combining longitudinal state-level data on benefit reduction rates (=sanctions) of the German welfare program Citizen’s Benefit with regional media reports from 2010 to 2020. First, using quantitative text analysis, I identify how immigration-related frames in regional news differ across Germany and contrast them with national reporting. Second, through panel data analysis, I examine how these regional differences affect administrative decisions. The findings reveal that immigrants face reduced sanction risks in regions where positive topics, such as voluntary engagement stories, are prevalent. In contrast, media coverage emphasizing financial burdens increases sanction risks for foreign welfare recipients. These results highlight the critical role of media in shaping bureaucratic behavior. This underscores the need to equip bureaucrats with tools to critically analyze reporting on immigration as well as the importance of amplifying positive narratives about immigration.