‘Abducted by ICE’ Campaigns are Damaging to Real Missing Persons Cases (Opinion)

Recently we ran an article exposing the significant human trafficking problem in Hagerstown, and as part of this article’s introduction we mentioned that some people are using phrases such as “ICE is kidnapping people” or that people have been “abducted by ICE”, or “this person is missing (because ICE kidnapped them)”. Not surprisingly this resulted in some backlash on social media with comments such as “don’t let distractions such as comparing ICE detention camps to human trafficking fool you.” And through this comment, our point was proven perfectly, on how equating ICE detention to human trafficking and missing persons is counter-productive.

The entire “this person is missing because ICE took them”, “this person was abducted by ICE”, is designed as an emotional plea to grab your attention. And while it may have immediate effects of increasing visibility, it can also result in compassion fatigue or alarm fatigue.

This fatigue occurs when the public is inundated with so many deceptive “missing person” posts, which often turn out to not actually be missing (because we know where they are, they’re in ICE custody), that they become desensitized. The result is a “Boy Who Cried Wolf” effect that causes people to stop sharing, interacting with, or paying attention to any missing person reports, including legitimate ones.

If a person is in federal custody, their location is technically “known” (by the government), even if it is withheld from the family. When users realize the person is in a jail or detention center, they often feel there is nothing they can physically do (they can’t “spot” them on the street). If the word “Missing” begins to synonymous with “Arrested” or “Detained,” the word loses its emergency urgency. Users may scroll past future “Missing” posters, assuming it is another political statement rather than an immediate safety crisis.

While “Abducted by ICE” posts and posters are driven by genuine distress and political advocacy rather than the malice of a scammer (such as completely fake missing persons posts designed to generate engagement and ad revenue), they unintentionally contribute to alarm fatigue. They ask the public to solve a legal/political problem by posing the problem as a search-and-rescue problem. Over time, this mismatch causes the public to disengage from “Missing” alerts entirely.

Recent poster campaigns are even more damaging. The posters mimic genuine missing person posters, featuring bright red letters at the top screaming “Missing son,” “Missing father,” or “Missing grandmother.” By co-opting these specific visual cues for a political statement, the campaign trains the public to view red-lettered “MISSING” flyers as advocacy art rather than emergency notifications. This exploits the public’s “Good Samaritan” instinct. A passerby stops, prepared to memorize a face or call a tip line to save a life. When they realize the person is not actually missing (in the sense of being lost/unknown) but is in federal custody, the psychological reward is replaced by political confrontation.

The next time that passerby sees a flyer, their subconscious reaction shifts from “I should help” to “I’m not going to get tricked again.”

The campaign explicitly redefines “Missing” to mean “Deported” or “Detained.” The posters say things like “Currently being held in a concentration camp” (referring to a prison in El Salvador) or “Abducted by ICE.” By blurring the line between “Unaccounted for” (a search emergency) and “Inaccessible” (a legal/custody tragedy), the campaign degrades the specific urgency of the word “Missing.” If “Missing” can mean “in jail,” then the word no longer commands immediate community searching.

People who disagree with the political message (or who just want to avoid politics) may start tuning out all missing person flyers to avoid the discomfort. This “blindness” means they won’t see the legitimate flyer for a confused elderly person posted in similar locations.

While the intent of the creators of these campaigns was to generate empathy (“This is someone’s grandmother”), the methodology directly parasitizes the public trust required for actual missing person searches. It trades the long-term effectiveness of emergency alerts for short-term political awareness. Just like redefining words as violence, redefining “missing” to equate to “detained by law enforcement” threatens to have long-lasting negative consequences.

The concept of “newspeak” in 1984 was a warning, not an instruction manual.

Opinion article by Ken Buckler, all opinions are his own and do not reflect those of our clients or sponsors.

---