Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

As Associated Press exiles the phrase “illegal immigrant”, bloggers ban the term “journalist”

As Associated Press exiles the phrase “illegal immigrant”, bloggers ban the term “journalist”

When journalism hits rock bottom, it grabs a jack hammer and keeps going.

As Professor Jacobson reported:  The Associated Press has banned the phase “illegal immigrant” from its style guide.

Yet, illegal immigration remains a serious problem for this country, despite the fact that Obama administration officials want to put a positive spin on the situation:

In a Senate hearing on February 13 of this year, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said U.S. border security has “never been stronger.” Last week, Republican Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake and Democratic Senators Charles Schumer and Michael Bennet toured the U.S. border in Nogales, Arizona and saw a woman climb an 18-foot fence before she was apprehended by American border security.

This year alone, American taxpayers are footing a $113 billion bill to ensure that illegal immigrants receive free education, health care, and other services, according to a study by Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a non-partisan group that has been called to testify in front of Congress about immigration bills more than any other group in the U.S.

Jay Baer, a social media and content strategist, once listed 4 ways that bloggers differ from reporters. Today we can add a 5th: Bloggers will actually assign a proper description to a person, place or thing.

The mocking of the AP’s new rules began almost immediately:

Sonny Bunch, managing editor of the Washington Free Beacon, imagined the new ruling applied to other social groups.

“‘Stalker’ is now to be ‘Person who really just wants to be loved, and that’s okay.’”

And via Professor Glenn Reynolds, comes a humorous analysis from Jay Leno (who says, “They will now use the phrase ‘undocumented Democrat’.”):

Michelle Malkin proposes an item for the “bloggers style guide”, with which I thoroughly agree:

I propose that we banish the term “journalist” when referring to members of mainstream news organizations who pose as neutral news-gathers while carrying out a blatantly ideological agenda. From now on, AP’s staffers shall be described in my columns as “alleged practitioners of journalism” or “journalists” only when using direct quotations.

As a friend of mine aptly put it: Journalism didn’t just die. It went to work for the enemy.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


As many have noted, when you control the language, you control thought.

My latest peeve is with the apparent quiescence to the term “gun violence”. You see it everywhere. There is no such thing. “Murder by firearm” is more accurate, and less deceptive, as “gun violence” often sweeps in suicides, along with self-defense.

Please help me take that away from the Collective. Whenever you see it, make it a point to oppose its use.

    Aarradin in reply to Ragspierre. | April 3, 2013 at 4:34 pm

    Exactly. I saw a stat recently that criminals shot by citizens acting in self defense far outnumber innocent victims shot by criminals. Don’t know if its true or not, but regardless, you’re point is correct: they use the generic ‘gun violence’ term to lump together everyone hit by a bullet, for whatever reason.

    The last thing D’s would ever do is acknowledge that gun ownership by law abiding citizens saves far more lives than it takes. Far better, for them, to go on touting some bogus ‘stat’ that advances their cause.

    Here is all the data you will ever need to permanently remove the phrase “gunviolence”:

    Gun Bans INCREASE violent Crime. The data is in…debate over.

“journalists” should be accurately described as what they are: propagandists for socialist tyranny.

Paul Krugman, as chief propagandists for the fascists, should be referred to simply as “Dr Goebbels”

If they wanted to substitute “3rd-world Spanish-speaking craphole” for “illegal immigrant”, that would be acceptable [and certainly accurate] to me. Call it like you see it.

TrooperJohnSmith | April 3, 2013 at 4:48 pm

Instead of “journalist,” the preferred terms are, in no particular order:

(1.) Obamapologist

(2.) Demediacrat

(3.) journalgasmist

(4.) Obamagandist

(5.) Democratic-auxiliary

(6.) media apparatchik

Sprayed coffee on my laptop when I read that this AM. The washin’ ain’t bad but the dryins’ a shit.

Terrible terrible noise. It is.

When describing a stenographer who works for the major media conglomerates/corporations, I prefer the accurate phrase, “Democrat with a byline.”

Mystery Meat | April 3, 2013 at 5:43 pm

Drudge quotes Jay Leno as saying the term replacing “illegal immigrants” will be “undocumented democrats.”

    Rosalie in reply to Mystery Meat. | April 3, 2013 at 6:55 pm

    I suspect that Leno is getting the boot because he had the audacity to be critical of O before the election. He sounds more and more as though he’s finally seen the light.

Will likely have to come up with an acronym that will stick.

It worked For RINOs

…for example: JINO, Journalist In Name Only.

I would like to take credit for the phrase “Undocumented Propagandist”. Which I posted HERE at this site, yesterday:

April 2, 2013 at 11:08pm

I don’t see a problem identifying the MSM as “journalists”.

A journal is kind of like a diary, and these MSM types are clearly akin to young teenage girls pining over who they want to marry.

As far as I’m concerned, the respectable title to which they have no claim is “reporter”.

Substituting “repeater” for “reporter” would be functionally accurate.
And when is AP going to replace “public servant” & “public service” with “government employee” & “government job” ?

Journalist=”undocumented Democrat”

Ms. Malkin left out the option, “tool.”

How about “Very useful idiot” or “Newspaperatchik”?