Usage: 'Latino' preferred over 'Hispanic'
A memo on usage from Assistant Managing Editor Henry Fuhrmann to Times copy editors:
We have updated our rule on the use of Latino to reflect more accurately what the editors of the 1995 Times stylebook intended: that the term in virtually all cases is the appropriate choice over Hispanic, in keeping with the practices and sensibilities of residents of our region.
We offer this combined new listing in place of two separate and occasionally confusing former entries:
Latino, Hispanic: Latino is the umbrella term for people in the United States of Latin American descent. It refers to Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans and others from the Spanish-speaking lands or cultures of Latin America. A Latino woman is a Latina. It is preferable to say that an individual is Mexican American, of Salvadoran descent and so forth, instead of using the umbrella term.
Keep in mind that Latino is an ethnic group, not a race category. Latinos may be of any race: white, black, Native American, Asian, mestizo, etc. Some speak Spanish; some don't. Some are U.S. born; others are immigrants.
Note: Hispanic is acceptable in quotes or in proper names. The U.S. Census Bureau uses terms such as "Hispanic or Latino" and "non-Hispanic or Latino" in its survey questions on ethnicity and race. Stories and graphics based on census information are allowed to use that language when it is essential to explain methodology, but we should otherwise use Latino to describe the people in question.
In describing the old entries as "occasionally confusing," we mean especially every 10 years upon the release of fresh census data. It was easy to see why many of us interpreted the old rules as not only an invitation to use Hispanic but, in census stories, a requirement to do so. The old entry on Hispanic said, in part, "Use Hispanic only in quotes, in proper names or reports based on census data."
So, to be clear: Latino should be used in nearly all contexts; the exceptions, as described in the revised entry, must truly be exceptional. The online stylebook has been updated accordingly.
[We thank our good friend Steve Padilla of the National assigning desk for his help in crafting the revised rule, as well as our retired colleague Frank Sotomayor, a member of the 1995 style committee who spotted an erroneous use of Hispanic a few months ago in a story citing 2010 census figures.]
Great. Now can you stop implying that Afghanistan and Pakistan are part of the Middle East? Unless the LA Times editors have summoned the genie of the lamp and asked it to transport the countries to a different geographic location.
Posted by: Sophie | July 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM
I am from South America and i am white. I have other customs than other people from Latin America, for instance. It is uncomfortable to be put in an umbrella and be called 'Hispanic'. For example, I dont eat tacos and i am tired to hear from most of US Citizen that because you speak spanish you are familiar with guacamole and chile. There is about 20 countries in the world where the oficial language is Spanish and others more places where they speak this language unofficially. People from Argentina,Bolivia,Chile,Costa Rica,Colombia,Cuba,Ecuador,Spain, El Salvador,Guatemala,Mexico, Nicaragua,Honduras,Panama, Peru,Puerto Rico,Paraguay, Dominican Republic,Uruguay, Venezuela, we are different in many ways. We are a crucible of races ( melting pot). In Europe they dont call latin. If you are from Venezuela they call you Venezuelan. We dont put under an umbrella to US Citizens, Canadian, British, irish, etc countries that speak english. An Argentine is not like a Mexican even if both speak spanish and sometimes they can understand each other because they have different accent and use different expressions. US Citizen need to learn more about the world.
Posted by: Sofia | July 28, 2011 at 11:47 AM
Wrong…wrong……wrong!!!
Wrong..regardless of what the American "Latino" population wants or prefers!
Latin "o": Peoples who are from or are descendants of "Latin" speaking countries and/or cultures (Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, Romania, etc.).
Hispanic: Peoples who are descendants (not from) of Spain and speak Spanish.
Latin or Latino is not exclusive to or owned by Hispanics (peoples in the Americas that speak Spanish).
Latin "o" is LANGUAGE based (from the Latin languages).
Hispanic is COUNTRY based (from the country of SPAIN).
A Spaniard (born in Spain) is not a Hispanic, they are LATINO.
Being French/Italian, I and others from Latin speaking countries really resent this commandeering of the term Latin or Latino.
Just sayin………...
Posted by: well traveled | July 28, 2011 at 11:05 PM
It's about time the Times got it right. Please send this article to Washington so they get it right. Next, get rid of the hyphenated descriptions.
Posted by: Erwin Speakman | July 29, 2011 at 07:09 AM
my grandmother was a german jew born in mexico in the early 1900's she was
nationally a mexican, ethnically european, "racially" white, the only latino or hispanic thing about her was that she spoke a language based on latin. Latino and hispanic are imperialistic terms that are very offensive to many ethnically native people on the american continents. These terms are designed to maginalize native americans and there contributions to the world society by inferring that their identity and culture is homogeneous and derived from european origins, which is clearly not the case.
Posted by: wht mexi | July 29, 2011 at 09:47 AM
A large number of Americans who are of African descent but have never been anywhere near the African Continent prefer the term black Americans and not "African Americans," but nobody listened to them. African American is just a subliminal devisive label to suggest that blacks aren't as American as their white counterparts.
Posted by: Eleanor | July 29, 2011 at 11:14 AM
So, what term do you use for Spanish-speaking people NOT from the lands or cultures of Latin America? (Spain, Guinea, the Phillipines.) Are they "spanish"?
Posted by: Ben | July 29, 2011 at 01:20 PM
I am not sure why the term "Hispanic" is not as favorable as the term "Latino". More so, if both terms do not refer to a race, but only ethnicity, what term do you use to describe the race of people that are "Latino"? Isn't ethnicity a subset within a racial group? For example, a Chinese would be classified as an "Asian" under "race" and "Chinese" under ethnicity? How can Mexicans and Colombians be considered the same ethnicity? If that is true, would it be also true to state that Japanese and Chinese are also of the same ethnicity? Is there even a word to describe the Latino race?
Posted by: M. Lee | July 29, 2011 at 03:02 PM
Articles often make a distinction between white, Black and latino. But your rules say latinos can be white. This is a contradiction which makes your usage incorrect....... Many local latinos incorrectly think all non-Hispanics are English or "Anglos." Many Hispanics from Mexico, for example, do not quite realize or acknowledge that there are white , non-latino Mexicans. Relying on a lack of basic knowledge is not a good basis for deciding on the use of terms such as 'latino'. There are many white people from Latin America. They are not Indian, indigenous, or latino . "Latino" in Spanish is "latin" in English and that does include white folks from Latin America as well as Italy for example. People get confused about words that are spelled the same but that have different usages in different languages. "laino' as used refers to Indian/indigenous or mixed, not to white/caucasian even if that person is from Latin America. In Spanish such a "persona" is "latina".
By the way, in English we typically do change the ending of a word depending on the gender of the person referred to. Why do you wish to use nonstandard/inferior English?
Posted by: jon | July 30, 2011 at 04:50 AM
The difference between Latino and Hispanic:
•Latino generally refers to countries (or cultures) that were once under Roman rule. This includes Italy, France, Spain, etc. Brazilians are considered to be Latino, but are not considered to be Hispanic.
•Hispanic describes cultures or countries that were once under Spanish rule (Mexico, Central America, and most South America where Spanish is the primary language).
Now that this is understood; I am a 50 year old Mexican-American male, born and raised in Redondo Beach, I am Hispanic, not Latino.
Posted by: Not Chicano or Latino | July 30, 2011 at 09:07 AM
Hispanic: of Spain………from Spain………..(country based)
Latin "o": Romance languages (Spanish, Italian, French, Portugese, Romanian, Catalan, Provencal, etc.)………………..(language based)
Spanish speaking Americans (north, south and central) do not have exclusive ownership of the designation of Latino. Latin or Latino is a broad term that includes all Latin speaking peoples. Hispanic is specific to non Spaniard, Spanish speaking people.
Maybe the author will post this, since he chose not to post my previous submission???
Posted by: well traveled | July 31, 2011 at 01:23 AM
Hispanics are also from Spain and when Latinos scream "Go Back To Europe" at loyal US Americans, they really include part of their own people. The ones that gave them the Spanish language.
I as a white US American, have a problem with black Americans being called "African Americans". If I was in their shoes, the phrase "African American" would be an insult along with being inaccurate. What does the average black American have to do with Africa?
I've read the citations of black Americans who won the Congressional Medal Of Honor, especially 1st Lieutenant John R Fox and wondered what a black American fighting against Nazi Germany in WW2 had to come home to?
Unlike Mexico, who declared war against Nazi Germany, then never sent a single soldier to fight them, black Americans earned the rights they have as Americans and don't have to rely on anti-American groups like LA RAZA to steal away from Americans what they never could build in Latin America. The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
Posted by: Bullfighter | July 31, 2011 at 03:35 AM
It's about time th media used the correct term which is Latino!
We Latinos never liked the term Hispanic, since it's a label from the government.
Here's an explanation:
The reason?
We feel 'Hispanic' comes from the government's definition about us. It's probably the reason why many Latinos don't use it.
What's our definition:
All countries from Mexico to Argentina, including the Caribbean (Puerto Rico, Cuba, Dominic Republic).
The official definition:
They come from top dictionaries, including this definition from the popular Wikipedia. Our defnitions are almost the same.
Are Brazilians & Spaniards also Latino?
This is a controversial question.
a. Brazil is in Latin America - but they don't speak Spanish. In addition, many Brazilians don't consider themselves Latinos.
b. Spain is in Europe - they invented the Spanish language, but don't consider themselves Latinos.
So what's our bottom line?
When we see Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Domincanos, Mexicans, Central & South Americans, or anyone that speaks Spanish, we're very proud to speak to them in Spanish - and call them LATINOS, OUR FAMILIA.
Posted by: Mario Cruz | July 31, 2011 at 10:59 AM
"Hispanic" was created in the Nixon administration so Filipinos could get Latino benefits. They refer to themselves as Asian when it is convenient, as well.
Posted by: CMC | July 31, 2011 at 03:21 PM
So a Mayan is a "Latino" even if he doesn't speak a word of Spanish?
This one-size-fits-all definition is so amorphous as to be comical:
- Latino can be any race
- Latino can speak any language
- Latino can be from any "Spanish-speaking land" (such as the United States and Canada?!)
So Chichen Itza and Machu Picchu are "Latino Heritage Sites"?
The Aztecs were "Proto-Latinos"?
All those Indigenous place names like "Mexico" or "Teotihuacan" are really "Latino" words?
Shame on the Times for forcing this White Supremacist-revisionist terminology on us!
Shame on the Times for using the 16th-century racial caste category of "mestizo".
What next? Will you refer to Black people as "mulattoes" or "Anglos" (they come from 'English-speaking countries" after all)?
Posted by: Ome-Coatl | July 31, 2011 at 08:33 PM
Alternatives to "latino".
Instead of defining everybody Eurocentrically (Spanish-European Colonial culture), how about recognizing that the Majority Population under this label has Indigenous Ancestry as their common denominator?
Therefore, I propose the terms:
1) "Nican Tlaca" (Indigenous in the Nahuatl language) or 2) Indigenous or 3) Indigenous-Ancestry or 4) Indigenous-Descent or 5) Indigenous/Mixed or 6) Native Mexican or 7) Mexican/Central American.
I don't see you guys going to great pains to "include" African-Americans into the "Anglo" label simply for 1) Speaking English 2) Having Anglo surnames 3) Being mixed with European blood or 4) "Coming from an English-speaking country".
Why so selective only against us?
Since you guys are so hung up on the "mixture" element in Mexicans/Central/South Americans, how about acknowledging that the overwhelming BULK of that mixture is Indigenous Ancestry?
Why is that so painful to acknowledge?
After all, the Times already acknowledges us as "nonwhites".
Posted by: Ome-Coatl | July 31, 2011 at 09:25 PM
so the south of the border people are starting with how do i want to be considered. and since hispanic isn't a race and neither is latino by the way. i didn't like to be called chicano, i started hating hispanic well latino that sounds better. once all my fellow softb bretheren are finally legal we can call ourselves mexican-american, honduras-american, anything softb-american.
Posted by: msfaye2u | August 01, 2011 at 07:50 AM
I got no problem with this, and will immediantly amend my brain to speak of it correctly from now on.
It's not a matter of what's "technically" correct. It's a matter of how those affected feel about the labels applied to them.
That's the only thing that's important here.
x
Posted by: xexon | August 01, 2011 at 06:04 PM
There are only 4 races!
Negroid
Caucasoid
Mongoloid
Australoid (this one is debated)
You can categorize as you will since we are all a mixture anyway.
Again:
Hispanic means of or from Spain (a descendant of). It is NOT a race.
Latin is a language and the "mother" of all Romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian and many others that do not have a proper country like Provencal).
Latino (a) is an ethnic group, not a race! There are many people that do not speak Spanish that consider themselves Latino.
Brazilians are not Hispanic. Haitians are not Hispanic.
This of course is all moot. It will be what it will be.
It is just annoying that the Hispanic folks want to take over the word Latin and then call themselves a race.
Maybe all the peoples of the world who speak English, German, Dutch, Swedish, etc. should call ourselves GERMANO and claim that we are a race?
Posted by: well traveled | August 02, 2011 at 12:18 AM
George Lopez doesn't like the term "hispanic" because it has the work "panic" in it.
Latino is cool.
Posted by: Armando | August 02, 2011 at 10:52 PM
I am a Mexican. I can trace my ancestry back 8 generations to Puebla. I am a Mexican, not Hispanic, not Latino, not Chicano or any other modern name by people trying to redefine themselves.
I am Mexican or as my father would say, "Yo, soy Mexicano."
Posted by: epespinoza8143 | August 04, 2011 at 12:04 AM
Chicano Please!
Posted by: Gilbert | August 04, 2011 at 10:28 AM
Spaniards are European and they resent being classified as Latino/Hispanic. Filipino people are Asian they speak Spanish because like many countries they were colonized by Spain.
Posted by: Lovely QAmerica | August 04, 2011 at 01:24 PM
The people of Ireland and Scotland are in the same geographical area as England but they do not like to be referred to as British. People from Europe dislike the term Latino as well because they associate it with Mexicans. Also, not everyone in South America speaks Spanish nor do they have Spanish cultures.
Posted by: A. Loyalist | August 04, 2011 at 01:51 PM
Who gives a rat's patoot. At the rate your going, pretty soon we'll be forced into using numbers instead of names. The reason being, that no matter what name is used to label a person, there will always be those who find that label offensive, degrading, or othewise, inappropriate. Therefore, in the future, since my relatives were born in Sicily, raised in England, and now reside in America, please refer to myself and my kind as 237-414-0022606-1/2. That is, unless per chance some of you find that label offensive... a.k.a. get a life.
Posted by: John Coonis | August 04, 2011 at 03:23 PM
I am an American and am proud of it.
Posted by: Nestor | August 05, 2011 at 12:45 PM
LATIN OR LATINO
I have to settle the following issue I have for once and for all:
Why we have to use the spanish word LATINO when we are speaking in English instead the actual translated word LATIN. ex: I'm Latino. This is gramatically incorrect!
Why we the media and marketers are allowing the use of SPANGLISH, when speaking in English or viceversa ?
Perhaps because Spanglish is the future new language or
is the government allowing or pushing us once again to fall in the confused group? With consensus we can stop the nonsense!
We all have the right to feel emotionally attached and find comfort in a grammatically incorrect word but unfortunately its a misleading way to represent a culture that has already been misunderstood and manipulated.
The term Latino shouldn't bother anybody instead we as latinos should embrace it passionately. However here I'm making a clear point on the proper translation and the grammatically correct use of that term and should be used at the right time with the right platforms and in the right context. So we can keep the integrity of those languages for future generations.
Posted by: Pablo Aguilar | August 08, 2011 at 09:49 AM
This is all so absurd. My mother is from Spain, my father was born in Guatemala from a Spanish family, and then he became an American. I was born a U.S. citizen in Venezuela. Am I Latino? Am I Hispanic? I consider myself an American. All other epithets are ridiculous to me -- and none describe my heritage. With the exception of a shared language, I have zero in common with Mexicans, Hondurans, Cubans, or any other Latin American nationality not in my background; in fact, I feel very foreign among them. So please, L.A. Times, figure out a new style. I quite liked the bit about, "It is preferable to say that an individual is ... of Salvadoran descent." Stick to that. Do some real reporting instead of lumping someone into a rotten potpourri of nationalities.
Posted by: Ken | August 08, 2011 at 08:38 PM
In my soon-to-be published book, The ABCs & Ñ of America's Cultural Evolution, I have attempted to capture both the "styles" dictated by various media with the usage of "Hispanic" and "Latino" within the various geographic regions of the nation:
"In an effort to shed light on this growing segment of our nation’s population, the term 'Latino' is used in these essays when referring to community, personal, political, social and other qualitative matters; 'Hispanic' is used in association with statistics, demographics and other quantitative topics. These labels were used initially to identify people originating from post-Colombian, Spanish-speaking areas of the Western Hemisphere, which to varying degrees have Spanish and other white European bloodlines in their family trees. Both labels are used by Latino advocacy and community-based organizations (CBOs) to coalesce diverse individuals and communities belonging to the major Spanish-speaking groups scattered across the USA. But, more about that later.
The word 'Hispanic' is a generic term that has been used in recent years to identify those in the U.S. who relate to their Spanish ancestry, language and cultural heritage. The U.S. Census Bureau adopted the term in 1970 to reflect the growth and diversity of mestizos in the U.S. and replaced self-identifying ethnic categories such as 'Mexican-American' and 'Puerto Rican' in their official questionnaires. It attempted to identify individuals who traced their origins to Spain or any of the Spanish-speaking nations of the Western Hemisphere. The Census Bureau classified all Latinos in the USA by using the following criteria, which for some reason de-emphasized references to indigenous native ancestry:
• Persons belonging to a household where Spanish was spoken;
• Persons with Spanish heritage by birth location; and
• Persons who self-identify as being of Spanish ancestry or bloodlines.
The terms 'Hispanic' and 'Latino' still overlap and continue to be interchangeable. Attempts to make either term universal have met with varying degrees of acceptance — and rejection. Preference for either of the two terms is influenced by age, geography, cultural orientation and degrees of assimilation.
The label one uses to address them should be determined based on the preference of the specific audience one wishes to reach. It is worth the time and effort to determine that preference! It is also important to note both labels remain specific to the USA and are seldom (if ever) used in other Spanish-speaking countries to identify a people.
Posted by: Jim Estrada | August 23, 2011 at 07:42 AM