Last month, Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr chided local media for its characterization of activists protesting Atlanta’s planned $90 million public safety complex.
- Carr urged media outlets to “stop calling these people protesters,” arguing that “rioters” was more fitting for the activists, some of whom broke windows and set a police car on fire during the downtown demonstration.
- The now-national, largely leaderless movement against the complex in southwest DeKalb County has sparked a debate about the language used to describe the people trying to halt the project.
Why it matters: Debate over the language used by public officials and law enforcement affects how people perceive what’s happening, further inflames the dispute and drives a deeper wedge between either side.
Driving the news: Elected officials from Gov. Brian Kemp to U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, both Republicans, have at times referred to the activists as “terrorists” and “militant activists.” Democratic Mayor Andre Dickens has called some of the out-of-state activists “outsiders.”
- Others, including many supporters of the largely leaderless movement, say they are activists who are working for the environment, public safety reform, outright police abolition, or a mix of the three.
- But during the fog of protest and the ensuing debate between public officials, law enforcement and activists, words matter.
What’s happening: Academics argue that labeling activists as “outsiders” reminds them of language segregationists used against activists during the civil rights era and that the word “terrorist” is often used to describe people actively opposing stances they support.
- “I literally have seen this playbook over and over again,” Sekou Franklin, a political science professor at Middle Tennessee State University who has been following the protests, told Axios.
What they’re saying Hannah Riley, who opposes the facility, said the terms used to describe activists “are being used by media and public officials…
Read the full article here
