(Jewish Group) The New York Times updates style guide to 'antisemitism,' losing the hyphen

[Behind the Aegis]

The New York Times has updated its style guide and now favors the use of the spelling “antisemitism” over “anti-Semitism.”

The change was made in August but was not announced publicly at the time. Jewish Insider reported the change Tuesday.

The spelling of the term has been the subject of debate for years. One of the loudest voices for dropping the hyphen has been Deborah Lipstadt, the historian who was recently nominated by the Biden administration as the State Department’s antisemitism envoy. Lipstadt has argued that keeping the hyphen and capital “S” implies the existence of a racial category called “Semite” that obscures actual hatred of Jews. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and the Anti-Defamation League also support the hyphen-less version.

Earlier this year, the Associated Press updated its style guide, which is used by media around the world, including this one, to adopt the hyphen-less version of the word. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency followed suit and The Times adopted the change in August, which it announced in a memo to editors at the paper.

more...

I understand Lipstadt's concerns, and find them reasonable, however, I still prefer "anti-Semitism" and see no need to change because of others' ignorance, stupidity, and bigotry.

Where are you on this? Which do YOU prefer and or use?

0 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	anti-Semitism
	0 (0%)
	antiSemitism
	0 (0%)
	antisemitism
	0 (0%)
	Judeophobia
	0 (0%)
	Jew-hatred
	0 (0%)
	Because there has to be...other (explain)
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NQAS]

1. Either way

It's really not anti(-)Semitism. It's hatred of Jews. It's a desire for Jews to be wiped off the planet. Anti, with or without the hyphen, just doesn't cut it. Same with Islamophobia or homophobia. It's not fear of Islam or fear of homosexuality. It's hatred. It's ragheads and sand n*****s. It's the world would be a better place without Muslims (that whole creating zero thing is so two millennia ago). It's fucking f*gs and lesbos and queers. It's sick, ungodly. It's the world would be a better place without the "homosexual agenda." Somehow anti- or -phobia are just not enough.

Racism and sexism and misogyny work, to a point. But again, in the times we're living in, they seem not quite strong enough.

Naming things is important. It puts everything in context. The rioters of January 6 were not tourists. They weren't even rioters. They were part of an attempted coup. They were insurrectionists. They were terrorists. And yet we dance around the issue of calling things what they are.