Avoiding Stereotypes: Language

Those experiencing economic hardship are often painted with a broad brush. Though it may be easier to use shorthand or labels when trying to write a snappy headline or speaking on air, using language that perpetuates stereotypes and stigma negatively impacts the people we report on. Here are some best practices to use when writing about economic mobility.

USE SELF-DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE

First and foremost, whenever possible, reporters should take care to ask the person or people they’re reporting on to describe themselves and make every effort to use that language in their work. Not only is sharing power a way to build trust, but it is also a critical to accurate reporting that is free of assumptions or stereotypes.

This principle is most applicable to descriptions of identity, like one’s race, gender, ethnicity, or nationality, for example. When using terms that their audience might be unfamiliar with or that require context, reporters should offer an explanation as a learning opportunity, rather than default to a well-known term that might not align with the subject’s experience.

For instance, if a subject describes themselves as African American rather than Black, African American should be used, even if a publication’s style guide defaults to Black. On the other hand, if a subject describes themselves as “middle class” though their income bracket is far above the national average, it’s important to note the discrepancy between their self-description and the true context.

BE PRECISE

Prioritize describing experiences over using shorthand, labels, and generalizations. A group of people seeking affordable housing might share that in common but perhaps not much else; describing them with a broad brush is a disservice to them and the reader. And when using terms like “poor neighborhood,” think about what you’re really trying to convey to your audience. Are its residents in a particular income bracket? Are a majority below the poverty line? How do you know this?

PEOPLE-FIRST, NOT LABEL-FIRST

Inevitably, reporting on groups of people requires a level of broader descriptive language. When necessary, use phrases that literally place words like “people,” “person” and other humanizing nouns before other descriptors. By emphasizing subjects’ humanity, we avoid the “othering” that often accompanies alienating labels like “the poor” or “the needy.” Examples:

• People experiencing economic uncertainty
• People experiencing economic hardship
• Communities living with/in poverty*
• Residents who can’t make ends meet

*Poverty is federally defined by household income and many of those who can’t make ends meet are left out of this particular definition. Be sure to use this term accurately and to consider additional populations when discussing poverty levels.

TERMS TO AVOID

• The poor/poor people. Poverty is a state, not a trait. Avoid using dehumanizing labels that define someone as one experience.
• A low-income person. Grammatically, a person can’t be low-income. Plus, wages aren’t the only factor in economic hardship. This term could misleadingly emphasize personal responsibility over systemic factors at play.
• Fallen on hard times. Economic hardship is not an accident, and euphemisms only further stigmatize those experiencing it.
• Economically disadvantaged. The term “disadvantaged” implies that economic prosperity or its opposite is inherent in a person, and not the product of many systemic factors.
• Poor citizens. This term unnecessarily leaves out non-citizens.
• The needy/in need. Everyone has needs and deserves to have them met. This euphemism stigmatizes those experiencing economic hardship by implying they are especially dependent.
• Poverty-stricken or -ridden. Poverty is not a disease and referring it to it with terms typically reserved for disease stigmatizes those experiencing it.
• Vulnerable. Vague labels like these provide little information about what the people they describe are really experiencing and obscure the reason they might be at risk in the first place.