The other day I received a brief note from someone who believed we were disrespecting President Obama.
"It's President Obama, not Mr. Obama, show some respect," the viewer said.
There are more than a few people who see prejudice in everything, and this has apparently been a debate among those who do.
Apparently, some people are upset, when we refer to the president as "Mr. Obama" within a story. They consider it disrespectful, or at worst, racist.
So, let me explain why we do.
Journalists in most newsrooms write their stories not just by the rules of grammar, but also by the rules of style. Everyone who has ever taken a basic news-writing course has an Associated Press Stylebook. It's basically the rules and guidelines for writing news in a consistent style. And it has some important rules for referring to the office of the presidency.
The AP says, on second reference in a story, to use only the last name of a president. In other words, the first time we refer to him, we say "President Obama." The second time we mention his name (in the same story), we should only use the name Obama, or "the president." However, the New York Times has taken to the practice of adding the term "Mr." out of respect for the presidency. We use the same practice.
At ABC 15, we've adopted the same practice for every president, and I suspect we will continue to do so. Before President Obama, it was "Mr. Bush" and "Mr Clinton." In fact, in editing copy for broadcast, I've often added the term "Mr." when I see simply the last name on second reference. Again, it's meant to respect the office. There's no intent to disrespect the man.
I should say no other office is afforded this style practice. Senator McCain is simply McCain on second reference. Governor Brewer is referred to as Brewer the second time around.
I know there are those who see conspiracies and hidden agendas in the media, so I don't necessarily expect to do much convincing here. But I would hope those who are searching for the truth would arm themselves with all the facts.
