Do we call Trump a racist?
I've been reading a number of thought-provoking articles this week about the appropriateness of using the term "racist" to describe the president and/or his tweets.
In a thoughtful piece on NPR, Keith Woods recommends foregoing labels like "racist." He writes, "That's an alternative to labels: Report. Quote people. Cite sources. Add context. Leave the moral labeling to the people affected; to the opinion writers, the editorial writers, the preachers and philosophers; and to the public we serve."
In the other corner, Issac Bailey writes on Nieman Reports that journalists should use the term since we are in the business of calling things by their names. He said, "In a moment in which clarity is worth its weight in gold, media once again stumbled down the confused path when most Americans are desperately looking for some direction so they can figure out what the heck is going on and what the heck they should think and do about it. ‘Yes, this is what racism looks like,’ we should be screaming to them—not as an editorial opinion, but as a fact."
I frame this debate in terms of peace journalism, and the notion that journalists should lead substantive societal discussions without deepening divisions and falling into the “us vs. them” narratives that many politicians seek. In a previous column, I wrote about the inadvisability of using the term “concentration camp” to describe immigrant detention centers. I oppose this term because I think it further divides us, and makes discussion across political boundaries even more difficult. The same can be said about the term “racist.” When we call Trump racist, are we tarring his supporters with the same brush? And if we are, aren’t we making it more difficult to have an adult dialogue with them about important issues like race and immigration?
I prefer using phrases like, “a tweet widely considered racist” and “comments echoing those of racist segregationists of the 1950’s.” Point out the historical similarities between Trump and the George Wallaces of the world, and between Trump's language and that used by white supremacists, and let readers apply their own labels and judgments.
I've been reading a number of thought-provoking articles this week about the appropriateness of using the term "racist" to describe the president and/or his tweets.
In a thoughtful piece on NPR, Keith Woods recommends foregoing labels like "racist." He writes, "That's an alternative to labels: Report. Quote people. Cite sources. Add context. Leave the moral labeling to the people affected; to the opinion writers, the editorial writers, the preachers and philosophers; and to the public we serve."
In the other corner, Issac Bailey writes on Nieman Reports that journalists should use the term since we are in the business of calling things by their names. He said, "In a moment in which clarity is worth its weight in gold, media once again stumbled down the confused path when most Americans are desperately looking for some direction so they can figure out what the heck is going on and what the heck they should think and do about it. ‘Yes, this is what racism looks like,’ we should be screaming to them—not as an editorial opinion, but as a fact."
I frame this debate in terms of peace journalism, and the notion that journalists should lead substantive societal discussions without deepening divisions and falling into the “us vs. them” narratives that many politicians seek. In a previous column, I wrote about the inadvisability of using the term “concentration camp” to describe immigrant detention centers. I oppose this term because I think it further divides us, and makes discussion across political boundaries even more difficult. The same can be said about the term “racist.” When we call Trump racist, are we tarring his supporters with the same brush? And if we are, aren’t we making it more difficult to have an adult dialogue with them about important issues like race and immigration?
I prefer using phrases like, “a tweet widely considered racist” and “comments echoing those of racist segregationists of the 1950’s.” Point out the historical similarities between Trump and the George Wallaces of the world, and between Trump's language and that used by white supremacists, and let readers apply their own labels and judgments.
No comments:
Post a Comment