Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
-
11-07-2012, 06:14 AM #1
What's wrong with using 'illegal immigrant'?
What's wrong with using 'illegal immigrant'?
sfgate.com
Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Published 9:37 p.m., Tuesday, November 6, 2012
There is a campaign under way to shame media companies into abandoning the term "illegal immigrant" and replacing it with kinder and gentler euphemisms such as "undocumented worker."
The National Association of Hispanic Journalists has even gone so far as to suggest that the phrase causes hate crimes.
The crusade against the "I-word" began in September when freelance journalist and activist Jose Antonio Vargas put media companies on notice. He said they would be monitored and when they used "illegal immigrant" - which he claims "dehumanizes" people - the infraction would be duly recorded.
Vargas - who was born in the Philippines, worked as a reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle, and last year revealed his status as an illegal immigrant - identified the Associated Press and the New York Times as "two main targets."
Both institutions have since defended the term and continue to use it. Let's hear it for common sense. Media companies - and the journalists who work for them - need to stand up to these pressure tactics. Here are 10 reasons why:
-- The wording is accurate.
-- The proposed change is about being politically correct. And this is not a good spot from which to practice journalism.
-- The word police simply want to sanitize the debate, so that immigration reformers don't get their hands dirty by condoning illegal activity.
-- The idea is to advance the argument that illegal immigration isn't really a crime.
-- For those who are concerned that the word "illegal" stirs negative emotions, many of those concerns can be addressed if we agree not to use it as a noun (i.e., "the illegals") and if we completely refrain from using the much more offensive term "illegal alien."
-- The charge that the term "dehumanizes" people is ridiculous.
-- This debate distracts from the real issues - i.e., the need for comprehensive immigration reform, an end to do-it-yourself state immigration laws, and a return to the days when deportation policies were not out of whack.
-- The issue also alienates supporters of comprehensive immigration reform.
-- This is a squabble among elites.
-- Finally, the crusade highlights the hypocrisy of liberal Democrats who like to think of themselves as progressives because they eschew a term such as "illegal" but then turn around and support a Democratic president who has racked up record numbers of deportations. This whole discussion is a reminder that those of us who support comprehensive immigration reform need to get our story straight. We have long argued that illegal immigrants should have the opportunity, via earned legalization, to make amends for wrongdoing. Is the new argument that those immigrants needn't bother because, on second thought, they did nothing wrong?
Read more: What's wrong with using 'illegal immigrant'? - SFGate
Join our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & to secure US borders by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn
-
11-08-2012, 02:37 AM #2
This one gets to the heart of the matter. If those illegals who are undercutting Americans for jobs can be redefined as just being job seekers, it'll become more difficult for patriots to get their ideas accepted by the mainstream media - assuming that those media outlets have not already adopted an Open Borders position. IMO the New York Times is all about open borders.
********************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country
American jobs for American workers
Fair trade, not free trade
Laura Loomer - Woke up this morning to a @nytimes article...
03-27-2024, 11:36 PM in General Discussion