Double plus ungood
As a former copy desk editor, I'm calling on TPM editors to drop the term "pro-life" as was used in coverage of the Randall Terry fiasco outside Nancy Pelosi's office.
The correct reference is anti-abortion. If someone supports abortion rights, they are pro-choice.
Stop getting caught up in what has become an Orwellian effort among political groups to influence public perception by controlling the vocabulary used to communicate about issues.
The correct reference is anti-abortion. If someone supports abortion rights, they are pro-choice.
Stop getting caught up in what has become an Orwellian effort among political groups to influence public perception by controlling the vocabulary used to communicate about issues.
Advertisement
Agreed. Especially since they aren't "pro life" anyway. They as a rule, favor capital punishment, wars, and have no interest in fetuses once they are born (as in once they actually achieve LIFE).
November 6, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, "pro-life" is bogus, a real red herring of a term.
November 6, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is it really any worse than "Christian"?
Personally, I'm in favor of using the labels that groups give to themselves. Everyone already knows whether or not there's any truth to it. Using one's own labels just contributes to persecution complexes and accusations of name-calling. If I say I saw a show yesterday on the "fair and balanced network", you know what I'm talking about, and if you know me at all, you know I'm not actually suggesting the network is fair or balanced.
November 6, 2009 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting comment, and I appreciate the post, but it really doesn't hold water. It's an issue of accuracy and not allowing PR-creep into at least the ideal of objective journalism. Besides, who isn't pro-life?
November 6, 2009 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jeffery Dahmer wasn't . . .
~OGD~
November 7, 2009 12:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
How about Fallopian Tube Fascists, or Reproductive Tract Police...
November 7, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
and maybe we can call the abortion clinics baby-brain scramblers.
November 7, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've been receiving lots of robo-call push-polls from the religious right lately. Each and every time I still get caught-up when the voice asks, "Are you pro-life?" I stumble verbally, and while I know it's only a recording, I still say, "Not by the meaning you intend it."
Anti-reproductive choice, forced maternity advocate; if I were a jornalist faced with which term to use, if I chose "pro-life", I would certainly put it inside quotation marks.
November 7, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
that's the point i'm raising. i'm not taking a stand on abortion. i'm saying only that journalism is about clarity. anti-abortion is accurate. pro-life is nuanced, even more so with quotation marks. Associated Press style isn't the law, but it does call for anti-abortion, and i think with good reason.
November 7, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink