The New York Times defended its use of the term “white nationalist” when covering the Charlottesville, Va. riots after readers complained that the term was too euphemistic.
NYT readers said the outlet using “white nationalist” to describe those who rallied around the Confederate statue of Robert E. Lee didn’t adequately describe those present, and even “normalized” the group.
“I truly believe that using this term is a large part of the problem in this country. By using it, you are normalizing these people,” reader Peter Davis emailed the outlet. “These people are ‘racists.’ They are ‘neo-Nazis.’ You are softening the harsh reality of their evil by giving them such a legitimized political title like that.”
NYT standards editor, Phil Corbett, argued in favor of the outlet using “white nationalist” over “white supremacist,” because the phrase could apply to all those present at the riots, adding that TheNYT had no intention of “soft-pedaling” the rioters’ views.
“The term ‘white nationalist’ seems quite clear in what it stands for: someone who embraces the notion that the United States should be primarily or solely a white society. But any of these terms could apply to those who were marching in the streets, chanting racist and anti-Semitic slogans and displaying the symbols of Nazi Germany and the secessionist South,” Corbett argued.
Corbett added that the reporters focused on the actions of those present, which probably served as the best description of who was there.
“As always, our reporters were most intent on describing the actions, the signs and the regalia to make it clear to our readers who the protesters were and what they represent,” Corbett wrote.
The New York Times also came under fire in April after they used the term “genital cutting” over “female genital mutilation” when describing the actions of the Michigan doctor who allegedly mutilated the genitalia of young girls.
“There’s a gulf between the Western (and some African) advocates who campaign against the practice and the people who follow the rite, and I felt the language used widened that chasm,” NYT science and health editor Celia Dugger said in response to an inquiry from The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Send tips to amber@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.