Worry Not- The New York Times Will Teach You How To Refer To Latinoids
9 June 2009, 12:00 PM. By Alex Alvarez
New York Times writers, and other journalists (or so we assume, not being journalists ourself), have their work cut out for them when it comes to deciding how, exactly, to describe Latinos. It’s hard, y’all! Luckily, we care little and describe everyone as either “Latino” or “non-Latino” or “some asshole,” and can get away with it to some extent because we happen to be a Hispantinoid. And an asshole.
Here are some nifty little rules the NYT staff follows when writing about The Browns and our reactions to them:
• While both “Latino” and “Hispanic” are generally acceptable, some people have a strong preference. We should respect those preferences as much as possible in referring to individuals and groups; reporters and editors should routinely ask.
We say: Both labels are relatively meaningless, and you cannot please all of the people all of the time. We personally go with Latino because Hispanic has colonial implications that many people don’t like.
• Specific references like “Puerto Rican” or “Mexican-American” or “Guatemalan immigrant” are often best.
We say: Such labels taken on different meanings based on context. For example, if someone is the victim of a hate crime, being a Guatemalan immigrant takes on a different connotation that if it is used to describe someone who committed a series of rapes.
- Judge Sotomayor clearly uses “Latina” for herself, and we should respect that preference whenever feasible. In more detailed references, we can note that her parents moved to New York from Puerto Rico. Once again, remember: they were not immigrants.
We say: How is someone who moves from one place to another not an immigrant? Not all immigrants are, like, poor and dirty. Being an immigrant is not a bad thing. And, the way we see it, it takes writing about a problematic word in a positive or neutral manner to slowly change public perception of that word.
• Our stylebook defines “Hispanic” as “descended from a Spanish-speaking land or culture.” But be aware that opinions vary on how broadly to apply these terms. Can “Hispanic immigrants” describe a group that includes Brazilians or other Portuguese speakers? Can “Hispanic” describe immigrants from Spain itself? Once again, being specific will help minimize confusion or ambiguity.
We say: When in doubt, don’t use anything. “Fulano de Tal of Spain,” for example, is sufficiently descriptive without having to go into detail about Fulano’s ethnic or national original.
Another helpful hint? Never assume someone is Latino based on a picture. There have been so many instances when someone will describe a person as Hispanic only to later discover they are, like, Turkish or Italian. Latinos don’t look like anything in particular. Except hot.
Hispanic? Latino? Or What? [NY Times]
(10) 
Post Your Comment
Did you know you can now share a link, image or video?
Click to submit your own notas.
“How is someone who moves from one place to another not an immigrant?”
Easy: you move from within a country to somewhere else within that same country. “Immigrant” normally implies moving from one country to another. Puerto Rico (whether one likes it or not, and I’m from there) is part of the United States at least insofar as citizenship is concerned (yeah yeah, we have our own Olympic team, totally different).
Like I said, I’m from Puerto Rico. When I moved from the island to Atlanta as a youngster, I didn’t immigrate, just like I didn’t immigrate when I later moved from the South to NYC. Sure, I had what you might call an immigrant experience, but I didn’t need to get a visa or a green card or even a new passport, didn’t have to take an oath of loyalty to a new country or hide from la migra.
“Not all immigrants are, like, poor and dirty.”
Maybe you should tell some Puerto Ricans that. Many take it as a point of pride that we are born American citizens. Calling Puerto Ricans immigrants implies (however unintentionally) that they were not American citizens before moving to the mainland. I think some Puerto Ricans would be offended by that.
-Jp
True, JP. Good point. I honestly always forget that Puerto Ricans have U.S. citizenship.
Although I still think the degree to which the NYT article mentions that Sotomayor’s aren’t immigrants as if saying so is insulting is funny. But, then again, maybe, like you pointed out, it is insulting to some Puerto Ricans.
you guys should start a “stupid things white liberals say to make themselves feel better about privilege” category on this blog.
“Another helpful hint? Never assume someone is Latino based on a picture. There have been so many instances when someone will describe a person as Hispanic only to later discover they are, like, Turkish or Italian”
Hey genius! Italians are the original Latinos . . .
Good afternoon, Mensa member. Italians may be “Latins,” but there is some debate (somewhere, I guess) as to whether they are “Latinos.” Which is kind of the point of the post - these labels are ever-shifting and arguably arbitrary. But, of course, you knew this.
“Good afternoon, Mensa member” …
Hahahahaha!!!!
Since Alex is defining what a Latino is or is not; what if you are born in the US, speaks terrible Spanish, has a Mexican mother and a Guatemalan father, does not like the term Hispanic or Latino, what am I?
To RB’s ghost: Clearly a Pocho.
Doh!
“To RB’s ghost: Clearly a Pocho”
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! SNAP!