'Journalists' without borders
Last Tuesday, The Associated Press announced that it is banishing the phrase “illegal immigrant” from its famous stylebook. The world's largest news-gathering outlet now advises reporters that “illegal” will “only refer to an action, not a person.”
AP explains that it wants to stop labeling people. Ha! This is the same organization that employs journalists who have repeatedly shown naked bias against tea partyers, gun owners and pro-life activists.
Just a few years ago, the AP resisted open-borders demands and the pressure of political correctness in favor of precision. In 2010, a member of the “Diversity Committee” of the Society of Professional Journalists argued that foreign lawbreakers should be labeled “undocumented workers” or “undocumented immigrants.”
But the idea that “undocumented workers” and “undocumented immigrants” are more objective labels than “illegal immigrants” is complete and utter nonsense. The euphemisms that mainstream “journalists” favor are far more politically loaded than the ones they're trying to replace.
It's a farce to call someone an “undocumented immigrant” whose pockets are overflowing with fraudulent documents — and that is usually the case with many of the suspected illegals featured in AP stories. At the time, the AP agreed.
So what changed? “Journalist” Kathleen Carroll, AP's executive editor, attributes the move to the “evolving” English language. I attribute it to the “evolving” transformation of once-neutral news organizations into brazenly transparent satellite lobbying outfits for the left.
It's not media bias that's the problem, of course. It's the sanctimonious pretense of objectivity to which these alleged practitioners of journalism cling.
Just look at the ABC News coverage of the AP's decision. “Journalist” Cristina Costantini praised the move and patted her own colleagues on the back for their progressivism. “Fusion, the ABC-Univision joint venture, does not use ‘illegal immigrant' because we believe it dehumanizes those it describes and we find it to be linguistically inaccurate.” On her Twitter account, “journalist” Costantini gushed that AP's capitulation came “thanks to the hard work of great people” such as Jose Antonio Vargas.
The former Washington Post reporter spearheaded the whitewashing of our language and our laws on behalf of illegal aliens. In 2011, with great fanfare and elite media sympathy, Vargas publicly declared himself an “undocumented immigrant.” Except, as he himself confessed, Vargas had documents coming out of his ears — including a fake passport with a fake name, a fake green card and a Social Security card his grandfather doctored for him at a Kinko's.
Open-borders euphemisms championed by Vargas and others once again serve as the perfect illumination of the agenda-driven, dominant progressive media. They're as activist inside their newsrooms as Vargas is out in the open. Vargas won't rest until the legal definition of American citizenship is obliterated. And neither will his “journalist” colleagues cheering him on.
Michelle Malkin is the author of “Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies” (Regnery 2009).
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Road Trip! Destination: Chicago
- Indiana couple’s bond grows stronger after devastating accident
- Shooting for net-zero: Equal energy in, out of the home
- Inappropriate dress wears thin in schools, courts, jails, elsewhere
- Mild spaghetti squash can stand in for pasta
- Original director seeks a restoration for new version of ‘Annie’
- West Virginia whips Oklahoma State for 4th straight win
- Steelers notebook: Ex-Steeler Sanders living up to his word
- Health care law compliance complex for employers
- Pennsylvania legisative redistricting to take full effect in state House elections
- Imagine chicken wings as a casserole