Thread: Media Giant New York Times Defends Use of “Illegal Immigrant” Label

Media Giant New York Times Defends Use of “Illegal Immigrant” Label

The New York Times’ public editor said Tuesday that she won’t urge journalists at the daily to stop using the term “illegal immigrant” to refer to undocumented people living in the United States despite requests that the phrase be discarded as inaccurate and inflammatory.

“Readers won’t benefit if Times bans the term ‘illegal immigrant,’ was the title of Tuesday’s blog post by Margaret Sullivan, whose job is to serve as an advocate for readers.

Illegal immigrant, she wrote, “is clear and accurate; it gets its job done in two words that are easily understood. The same cannot be said of the most frequently suggested alternatives - ‘unauthorized,’ ‘immigrants without legal status,’ ‘undocumented.’”

“This is not a judgment on immigration policy or on the various positions surrounding immigration reform, or those who hold those positions. Nor is it meant to be uncaring about the people to whom the words apply,” the public editor said.

“It’s simply a judgment about clarity and accuracy, which readers hold so dear,” Sullivan concluded.

With this decision, The New York Times attempted to definitively settle the debate opened by Filipino-American journalist Jose Antonio Vargas, who expressly asked the paper not to use the expression “illegal immigrants,” saying that the phrase was “imprecise, inaccurate and inflammatory.”

Vargas launched the debate last year when he published in The New York Times an article entitled “My Life as an Undocumented Immigrant,” in which he recounted his personal experience to denounce the treatment undocumented foreigners receive in the United States.

Media Giant New York Times Defends Use "Illegal Immigrant" Label - Hispanically Speaking News

Interesting. I never thought we would see the New York Times stand up at all against the Political Correctness tyranny of thought we face in America today. Interesting indeed!

W

Here is another one for you. The Orlando Sentinel (endorsed Obama in 200 endorsed Romney.

Our pick for president: Romney


October 19, 2012


Two days after his lackluster first debate performance, President Barack Obama's re-election hopes got a timely boost. The government's monthly jobless report for September showed the nation's unemployment rate fell below 8 percent for the first time since he took office.

If that were the only metric that mattered, the president might credibly argue that the U.S. economy was finally on the right track. Unfortunately for him, and for the American people, he can't.

Economic growth, three years into the recovery, is anemic. Family incomes are down, poverty is up. Obama's Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, highlighted these and other hard truths in this week's second debate.

Even the September jobless numbers deserve an asterisk, because more than 4 million Americans have given up looking for work since January 2009.

And while the nation's economy is still sputtering nearly four years after Obama took office, the federal government is more than $5 trillion deeper in debt. It just racked up its fourth straight 13-figure shortfall.

We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years. For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race.

Obama's defenders would argue that he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression, and would have made more progress if not for obstruction fromRepublicans in Congress. But Democrats held strong majorities in the House and Senate during his first two years.

Other presidents have succeeded even with the other party controlling Capitol Hill. Democrat Bill Clintonpresided over an economic boom and balanced the budget working with Republicans. Leaders find a way.

With Obama in charge, the federal government came perilously close to a default last year. Now it's lurching toward another crisis with the impending arrival of massive tax hikes and spending cuts on Jan. 1.

The next president is likely to be dealing with a Congress where at least one, if not both, chambers are controlled by Republicans. It verges on magical thinking to expect Obama to get different results in the next four years.

Two years ago, a bipartisan panel the president appointed recommended a 10-year, $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. Rather than embrace it and sell it to the American people, Obama took his own, less ambitious plan to Congress, where it was largely ignored by both parties.

Now the president and his supporters are attacking Romney because his long-term budget blueprint calls for money-saving reforms to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, three of the biggest drivers of deficit spending. Obama would be more credible in critiquing the proposal if he had a serious alternative for bringing entitlement spending under control. He doesn't.
Romney is not our ideal candidate for president. We've been turned off by his appeals to social conservatives and immigration extremists. Like most presidential hopefuls, including Obama four years ago, Romney faces a steep learning curve on foreign policy.

But the core of Romney's campaign platform, his five-point plan, at least shows he understands that reviving the economy and repairing the government's balance sheet are imperative — now, not four years in the future.

Romney has a strong record of leadership to run on. He built a successful business. He rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from scandal and mismanagement. As governor of Massachusetts, he worked with a Democrat-dominated legislature to close a $3billion budget deficit without borrowing or raising taxes, and pass the health plan that became a national model.
This is Romney's time to lead, again. If he doesn't produce results — even with a hostile Senate — we'll be ready in 2016 to get behind someone else who will.

We reject the innuendo that some critics have heaped on the president. We don't think he's a business-hating socialist. We don't think he's intent on weakening the American military. We don't think he's unpatriotic. And, no, we don't think he was born outside the United States.

But after reflecting on his four years in the White House, we also don't think that he's the best qualified candidate in this race.
We endorse Mitt Romney for president.

Orlando Sentinel endorses Mitt Romney for president - OrlandoSentinel.com

New York Times Media Group New York Times' marquee newspapers.

• International Herald Tribune of Paris, France
• The New York Times of New York City

[edit] New England Media Group

Two of the three largest-circulation newspapers in Massachusetts, purchased in 1993 (Boston) and 1999 (Worcester). This group also includes boston.com.

• The Boston Globe of Boston, Massachusetts
• Telegram & Gazette of Worcester, Massachusetts

Added to Homepage:
http://www.alipac.us/content/media-g...94-label-1054/

RELATED

http://www.alipac.us/f12/illegal-imm...not-ap-265609/