AP Stylebook Now Says Don’t Call Riots “Riots”

AP Stylebook Now Says Don’t Call Riots “Riots”

For months now, the mainstream media and Democrats have used variations of the term “peaceful protests” to describe the nightly Antifa/BLM-led riots in Democrat-run cities like Portland and Seattle that have turned parts of these cities into apocalyptic warzones.

We all remember the infamous clip of MSNBC’s Ali Velshi morphing into Baghdad Bob by proclaiming, “This is mostly a protest. It is not, generally speaking, unruly” as fires and riots raged behind him in Minneapolis shortly after the death of George Floyd:

MSNBC reporter just now: "I want to be clear on how I characterize this. This is mostly a protest. It is not generally speaking unruly."

The guy is literally standing in front of a burning building in the middle of a riot. pic.twitter.com/IzCV6On4sF

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) May 29, 2020

Despite the media’s deliberate attempts at deception, those of us in the real world who have watched the near-constant stream of video footage shared on social media know that the correct word to describe the scenes at these supposedly “peaceful protests” is, in fact, riots.

Fires are routinely set, looting is a frequent occurrence, and incendiary devices are often thrown at officers and buildings. Entire city blocks have been destroyed, burned to the ground, thanks to violent rioters. Random drivers and outdoor restaurant patrons are sometimes harassed, held captive in some respects, and in some incidents have been forced to make pledges. In some instances, innocent bystanders, counter-protesters, and those defending their property have been assaulted – or killed.

It’s insulting in the extreme to any sane American who has been paying attention to the politically-motivated anarchy to see a supposed reporter—especially those on the scene—refer to the burning down of local communities as “peaceful protests,” “mostly peaceful,” or “not, generally speaking, unruly.”

But in spite of the pushback from Republicans and conservatives against the media’s/left’s utterly grotesque gaslighting on the riots, the journalists at the AP Stylebook announced last week that the word “riots” was offensive and stigmatizing.

Instead, they will be using terms like “unrest”, “revolt”, and “uprising” to describe “protests” and “demonstrations” that they acknowledge “can be legal or illegal, organized or spontaneous, peaceful or violent, and involve any number of people”:

New guidance on AP Stylebook Online:

Use care in deciding which term best applies:
A riot is a wild or violent disturbance of the peace involving a group of people. The term riot suggests uncontrolled chaos and pandemonium. (1/5)

— APStylebook (@APStylebook) September 30, 2020

Focusing on rioting and property destruction rather than underlying grievance has been used in the past to stigmatize broad swaths of people protesting against lynching, police brutality or for racial justice, going back to the urban uprisings of the 1960s. (2/5)

— APStylebook (@APStylebook) September 30, 2020

Unrest is a vaguer, milder and less emotional term for a condition of angry discontent and protest verging on revolt. (3/5)

— APStylebook (@APStylebook) September 30, 2020

Protest and demonstration refer to specific actions such as marches, sit-ins, rallies or other actions meant to register dissent. They can be legal or illegal, organized or spontaneous, peaceful or violent, and involve any number of people. (4/5)

— APStylebook (@APStylebook) September 30, 2020

Revolt and uprising both suggest a broader political dimension or civil upheavals, a sustained period of protests or unrest against powerful groups or governing systems. (5/5)

— APStylebook (@APStylebook) September 30, 2020

All of this is in addition to how they advise reporters to carefully approach using the word “looting”:

Feels like a good time to post AP’s guidance on the word looting: pic.twitter.com/hjxQWbSYAx

— Kimberlee Kruesi (@kkruesi) May 31, 2020

Understandably, people who are fed up with this insanity were not amused, and called out the AP’s announcement for what it was:

Orwell’s 1984 was not intended to be a “how to” manual.

— Syrah Shiraz (@Syrah_Shiraz) October 1, 2020

*George Orwell has entered the chat*

— The Doktor (@ScienceJesus) October 1, 2020

“this process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films,…photographs-to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance.” – 1984

— Seeking Truth (@RedestPill) October 1, 2020

When you control the words, you can control the narrative.

— ConservativeCorax89 (@YitzRozen) October 1, 2020

The timeless words of Thomas Sowell are also worth referencing here:

It is the public that reads newspapers and magazines, that listens to radio or watches television. They are depending on journalists to tell them the truth as they see it and to offer their honest opinion as to what it means.

Journalists cannot serve two masters. To the extent that they take on the task of suppressing information or biting their tongue for the sake of some political agenda, they are betraying the trust of the public and corrupting their own profession.

Sowell wrote that over 12 years ago. Sadly, the Associated Press’s continual redefining of words to mean whatever’s politically convenient at any given time to the left’s warped narratives is just further proof he’s right. The political corruption of the journalism profession at this point is almost wholly complete.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.