A story on a local organization reaching out to help the unhoused in my current area. The director of the organization is quoted using the term “unhoused”, but the reporter (or their editor) decided to use the more charged term “homeless” in the by-line and the article.

  • ConTheLibrarian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I used to do security at some shelters and the local Ministry for Social Development offices (Welfare office). Through those experiences I learned that there is a big, big difference between calling someone homeless/addict or saying “experiencing homelessness/addiction”

    The title says it the correct way, the opening paragraph does not. That being said, “unhoused” doesn’t colloquially imply homeless and could be misconstrued as people being evicted. Regardless, after reading the article I don’t think the author intended to degrade people with their wording.

    Anecdotally, I think we do a disservice to the people directly suffering from homelessness/addiction/mental health by misdirecting our frustrations towards the journalists increasing awareness of the problem.

    Similarly, I think we do disservice to a lot of victimized and marginalized people by continually ‘improving’ the language surrounding specific issues and subsequently attacking people -who are engaging the topic in good faith- for not adopting the prescribed nomenclature fast enough.

    • displaced_city_mouse@midwest.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      …there is a big, big difference between calling someone homeless/addict or saying “experiencing homelessness/addiction”

      I agree with this – my point in bringing this up was to highlight the differences in the language we use and the images and ideas those words conjure in the reader/listener. Your experiences are much more direct than mine, and I appreciate the insight.

      … I don’t think the author intended to degrade people with their wording. … I think we do a disservice to the people directly suffering from homelessness/addiction/mental health by misdirecting our frustrations towards the journalists increasing awareness of the problem.

      I see your points. However, had the director of the facility also used the term “homeless”, I would have never posted this. Its the changing of the word from what was said to what was written that gave me pause.

      On the other hand, you have also given me some other ways to think about this story and how it was presented. Thanks for forcing me to confront some of my biases.

      • ConTheLibrarian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Barring evidence of malice, if anyone deserves the benefit of the doubt on intent, its gotta be the person running the shelter. That’s not an easy job, to say the least.

        I get where you’re coming from though because in these post-ironic days people use everything to mean anything making it hard to guess intent.