It’s common to reach for political labels when reporting on elections. But what language we use and how is becoming even more salient with shifts in American politics. Today’s dynamic political landscape often upends the traditional meaning or understanding of a label, making it even more important for journalists to seek precision and avoid blurry generalizations.
Avoiding mis- and disinformation, too, requires careful consideration of language. While disinformation is spread by bad actors, confusion around a story or narrative can also make people more susceptible to misunderstanding and misinformation. Planning ahead and carefully communicating facts can help build trust and prevent doubt or skepticism from community members about your elections reporting.
Are there other election coverage challenges or concerns on your mind? Reach out and let’s chat — we can share further resources with you or address those questions in future newsletters.
Decide what political labels your newsroom will use in elections reporting
When describing a politician or political group in stories, it’s easy to reach for labels — conservative, liberal, moderate, progressive, etc. They can be a quick way to identify where someone falls on the political spectrum. But these labels can be problematic when they generalize or oversimplify.
Quick reflection: Are there labels that tend to cause confusion with your audience, or terms they react strongly towards?
Why this works: News organizations don’t have time to adjudicate these terms every time they arise, so it’s worth discussing them ahead of time.
What this looks like in action: Talk it out with the politics team, standards editors, copy editors, audience and engagement teams. Ask your political staff to reflect on the use of these terms before the meeting. Make clear that you’re trying to inspire a thoughtful conversation about precise language, not seeking to impose blanket bans on terms or phrases.
Try this
Start here (40 minutes)
Look at 10 or so recent political stories that use political shortcuts. Look at terms like “conservative,” “liberal,” “moderate,” “progressive” and “centrist.” Have they been used with precision? Imagine yourself as a typical reader or viewer. Do you think they know what you mean?
Brainstorm alternatives
If your organization’s reporting plans to avoid the standard labels listed above, what should be used instead? Could there be a stylebook entry that helps journalists think through ways to be more precise?
Communicate your approach
Consider ways to be transparent with your audience about your approach to these terms — an editor’s note, perhaps, or a standing explanation to readers that you can link to when you use these terms.
- New Hampshire Public Radio tells readers why it plans to “just drop the labels and describe the ideas and actions.”
Prepare for mis- and disinformation
Mis- and disinformation often pops up unexpectedly. Sometimes that’s the whole point — disinformation is designed to quickly hijack people’s minds. In election season, partisans can spread falsehoods about candidates, their positions on the issues or things they supposedly said. Sometimes real quotes are taken out of context, then spread on social media. But even though mis- and disinformation arises without warning, there are ways to plan for how you’re going to handle it.
Quick reflection: What type of mis- or disinformation is most likely to spread in your community?
Why this works: Getting a grasp on what falsehoods might pop up and through what channels can help you proactively inoculate your audience against mis- and disinformation.
What this looks like in action: A new study highlights the role of local news in mitigating the spread of misinformation, sharing two case studies:
- The Watauga Democrat addressed viral rumors of ICE activity in Boone, N.C., by quickly debunking the concerns and explaining what ICE was doing in the area.
- The German collaborative journalism network Correctiv.Lokal pooled resources and reporting to address common topics of misinformation, giving local news outlets a factual place to start and a way to further amplify their reporting.
- Similarly, Factchequeado runs a hub that debunks mis- and disinformation in Spanish, enabling media partners to quickly access resources to report on common falsehoods.
Try this
Start here (30 minutes)
Make a list of common mis- and disinformation themes you’ve seen emerge within your community or from local politicians.
Be prepared to respond
Devise boilerplate language and gather facts to contradict the mis- and disinformation reporters are most likely to encounter — whether interviewing politicians or members of the community. Work with beat reporters and editors to build out a collection of boilerplate sentences that refute the most common falsehoods that appear in your newsroom’s reporting.
For example, say a local politician makes a claim about Democrats rigging the 2020 election. You’ll need to have boilerplate language on hand to quickly insert in the story if you quote this person. An example might be:
“There is no evidence that the 2020 election was rigged or that there was widespread election fraud. After the election, President Trump’s attorney general, William Barr, said his department had uncovered no fraud on a level that would have caused a different outcome of the election.”
Your own language will apply to local news and local issues, by design.
Keep track of trends
Continue to take note of falsehoods repeated by community members and, if possible, get a sense of where they heard it and why they believe it — it may well expose an information gap in the community that your news organization can fill.
- Take advantage of PEN America’s counter-disinformation tools
