HOW IT STARTED: How the AP Slanted Border Coverage to Hide the Crisis.
A March 25 Washington Post op-ed by the editorial director of the pro-immigration site Futuro Media revealed that AP changed its directive at the demands of activists. Julio Varela said in his column he complained to the AP about the use of words like “surge” in its immigration coverage, suggesting news outlets use “entering,” “crossing the border,” and “increase” instead.
The AP told Varela his complaint came at the perfect time: Editors there were already “discussing word choices internally” and just assembled a memo addressing concerns by Latino activists. Varela, pleased with the news, called on the rest of the media to follow suit lest they be accused of using a “dehumanizing term.”
“The AP deserves recognition for moving in the right direction,” the author wrote. “I urge all reporters, TV producers, and editors in newsrooms all over the United States to pay close attention to the words they use in their coverage.”
Shortly thereafter, left-wing members of Congress such as New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D.) told supporters that using the word “surge” is a “white supremacist idea.”
The AP’s recommendations were adopted by news organizations such as Politico, which asked its staff, among other things, to no longer describe the unprecedented flood of illegal immigrants to the southern border as a “crisis.”
At the time of the AP’s new guidance, the United States saw unaccompanied migrant children cross the border at levels not seen in decades, according to data provided from Customs and Border Protection. The agency said it saw a more than 70 percent increase in illegal border crossings in March compared with the previous month.
The AP did not respond to a request for comment.
President Joe Biden called the situation on the border a “crisis” on April 17, although the White House backtracked two days later with an unnamed official telling CNN “there is no change in position” and that “children coming to our border … is not a crisis.”
—The Washington Free Beacon, May 18th, 2021.
How it’s going:
● Martha’s Vineyard responds to crisis.
—NBC Boston, today.
● Migrant surge strains NYC, D.C. resources.
—NBC, August 22nd.
As Karol Markowicz writes: DeSantis was right to send migrants to Martha’s Vineyard. We need to bring border crisis to Democrats.
In theory, everyone should be happy with the move. Migrants get to be taken to this beautiful location in Massachusetts, a “sanctuary” state where they should feel welcome.
Instead, the left is angry about this. “Deeply deeply sick and dehumanizing to fling human beings somewhere vindictively.” tweeted MSNBC host Chris Hayes.
But why? What is the point of being a sanctuary city or state if not to specifically provide sanctuary? It’s not vindictiveness to make the policymakers share the burden they are creating. In fact, it’s the only way change is possible.
The left are also angry that the tactics that St. Alinsky would love are being used against them. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules…A good tactic is one your people enjoy…Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”
Why, it’s as if: The GOP is Learning How to Fight.