[lg policy] linguistic hygiene

Fri Mar 16 14:36:11 UTC 2018

 Critical Thinking: Are Newspapers Wrong in Downplaying Vulgar Language in
Print?
By: Jesus Ruiz <https://www.editorandpublisher.com/author/jruiz/>

[image: CriticalThinking-march-2018]
<http://www.editorandpublisher.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CriticalThinking-Web-march-2018.jpg>

*When President Trump used the word “shithole” recently, some newspapers
decided not to run the word in print or used edited versions. Were
newspapers wrong in downplaying the vulgarity?*

*
<http://www.editorandpublisher.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Kellie-Chudzinski_web.jpg>Kellie
Chudzinski, 21, junior, Loyola Marymount University (Los Angeles, Calif.)*

*Chudzinski is editor-in-chief at the *Los Angeles Loyolan*, the
student-run newspaper of Loyola Marymount University and is a
communications major.*

After the *Washington Post* reported that Donald Trump referred to African
nations, Haiti and El Salvador as “shithole countries,” in a conversation
with senators at the White House, another Trump-media-firestorm began.
Media outlets, both digital and broadcast, had to decide on publishing or
broadcasting Trump’s reported remarks, with some abstaining. For
organizations that chose to not use the word, a great disservice was done
to readers.

While I understand the concern of editors not wanting to print unnecessary
vulgarity for their readers, ultimately, the reported comments are integral
to understanding the situation and the views of the president. It does not
benefit readers to sugarcoat real language and conversations. It shouldn’t
be an editorial decision to report the president’s remarks, but rather how
to use them and not to be careless with them and perpetuate a problem in
itself.

The words we use matter. The words used by the president of the United
States in an Oval Office meeting, on immigration with senators, matters.
Language is of the utmost importance in the immigration policy decisions
and legislation he is discussing.

News media has been tasked, especially recently, with not only reporting
accurately and responsibly what is happening for record, but also of
connecting what has happened to past and showing pattern of behavior and
how that connects more broadly to society. It should always be the goal of
journalists to inform unequivocally, there is no way to report accurately
by abbreviating comments of this nature. Knowledge is power—to make
informed decisions in our society being provided with the information
available is crucial. To downplay the comments or only explain them in the
context of a president using vulgarity is misleading because his views do
play a larger role in the way in which he will move forward with
legislation and policy.

It is important not to get wrapped up in the turmoil from one comment
coming from the president, but rather focus on the actual policy coming
from the administration, and if and when it deserves scrutiny, then give it
hell.

<http://www.editorandpublisher.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Joel-Christopher_web.jpg>

*Joel Christopher**, 46, executive editor, Louisville (Ky.) Courier Journal*

*Christopher has served as executive editor in Louisville since December
2016, and in various editing roles in the USA TODAY NETWORK since 2001.*

Without question, newspapers that declined to spell out shithole erred in
downplaying the vulgarity. It’s puzzling to see journalists scrubbing words
of their impact.

The president himself explicitly defines himself in contrast to other
political figures, and his explicit language is part of that distinction.
His base’s loyalty is rooted in his fearlessness about speaking in a way
unlike any other public official, so to enfeeble this particular word runs
counter to Donald Trump’s own carefully crafted message and persona.

This particular word, too, carried such a connotative shock to the
conscience of some who heard the president use it that it derailed the
immigration deal that was under discussion. The events that followed,
including the government shutdown, demonstrated just how powerfully the
word landed. To convey the full impact it’s important for the reader to
experience it much like those in the room who heard it experienced it.

This wasn’t George W. Bush calling Adam Clymer a “major league asshole” in
front of a hot mic.  This wasn’t Joe Biden telling President Obama, also in
range of an open mic, “This is a big fucking deal.” This was the president
of the United States using derogatory language to characterize nations and
peoples in an open conversation that included a high-ranking member of the
opposition party.

We too often underestimate our readers and their tolerance for absorbing
profanity, vulgarity and obscenity that’s contextually presented.

When you delve into the fracture points in our society, they are around
issues and ideologies and values that often grind against one another over
word choice.

We owe it to our reverence for language and passion for truth in its full
context to let words speak for themselves.

-- 
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

 Harold F. Schiffman

Professor Emeritus of
 Dravidian Linguistics and Culture
Dept. of South Asia Studies
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305

Phone:  (215) 898-7475
Fax:  (215) 573-2138

Email:  haroldfs at gmail.com
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/

-------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20180316/04b0c77d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list