What's with the "Mr. Obama"?

[Perry]

I've read two articles today (NYT and MSNBC) that refer to him only as Mr. Obama. Is this new or do I live under a rock? I don't recall previous presidents being called Mr.

 

I'm not trying to stir the pot. I'm really curious if it's always been this way and I've never noticed. It's certainly possible.

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I don't remember Bush being referred to in this way during his presidency. It is a not-so-subtle way to demote him from role of President to ordinary citizen, imho.

[bkpan]

They did it to Bush also. In fact, I remember threads here complaining of that very thing. I agree that the office deserves the title, regardless of who is currently in it.

 

Kim

[MIch elle]

The first time in a news article they refer to him as "President" Obama but there after in the same article he will be refer to as "Mr.". This was standard journalistic procedure. That's what I recall from listening to it on NPR.

[Perry]

The first time in a news article they refer to him as "President" Obama but there after in the same article he will be refer to as "Mr.". This was standard journalistic procedure. That's what I recall from listening to it on NPR.

 

Thanks. I didn't know that.

[Tree House Academy]

I referred to him that way in a thread here...and really it was for no other reason than not wanting to type out the word "President." Actually, most of the time I just call him "Obama" - the same way I called President Bush, "W."

Edited July 18, 2009 by Tree House Academy

[battlemaiden]

They did it to Bush also. In fact, I remember threads here complaining of that very thing. I agree that the office deserves the title, regardless of who is currently in it.

 

Kim

 

I agree. I also think it happens to writers when they have to use a title often in their articles. They switch it up for variety. I'm not sure I would read that much into it. I remember it happening to Bush too.

 

Jo

[LMA]

During Pres. Bush's term, one editorial I read said that calling the President by Mister was just a reflection of people wanting everything casual - from having children address adults by their first names, people wearing business casual clothes, not having formal invitations for weddings, and people not setting a dining table properly. It's nothing personal to the person in the Office, just another extension of our casual society. If we are dispensing with all formality in everyday life , then it's natural that we start referring to the President informally also. Why should the President's office be any different? Formality starts at the personal level from manners to dress to titles.

[lisasaysto]

If the article is from the New York Times or a paper that uses the New York Times stylebook, you will see titles for everyone mentioned by name, not just the president. On second reference, everyone is Mrs. or Mr. or Dr., etc.

 

If the article is from a publication that uses the Associated Press stylebook (which is more common), you will not see any titles used at all.

 

The paper I work for uses AP style.

 

HTH,

[Melinda in VT]

At first I thought you were being sarcastic, because I definitely remember more than one poster here complaining when this happened to GWB.

 

It's nice to see that the journalists are sticking to their style guides even for liberal presidents. ;)

[battlemaiden]

If the article is from the New York Times or a paper that uses the New York Times stylebook, you will see titles for everyone mentioned by name, not just the president. On second reference, everyone is Mrs. or Mr. or Dr., etc.

 

If the article is from a publication that uses the Associated Press stylebook (which is more common), you will not see any titles used at all.

 

The paper I work for uses AP style.

 

HTH,

 

Well, there you have it. Thank you very much for clearing it up.

 

Jo

[Perry]

I remember it with Bush too. It is generally when they don't like some policy. I think it is very disrespectful. :glare:

 

Well, that's what I was wondering, since I hadn't noticed before.

[SFP]

Journalistic style has nothing to do with how a writer, editor or publication feels about a particular policy or politician.

[Perry]

If the article is from the New York Times or a paper that uses the New York Times stylebook, you will see titles for everyone mentioned by name, not just the president. On second reference, everyone is Mrs. or Mr. or Dr., etc.

 

If the article is from a publication that uses the Associated Press stylebook (which is more common), you will not see any titles used at all.

 

The paper I work for uses AP style.

 

HTH,

 

Thank you! I rarely read the NYT and did not realize there are different stylebooks. So it seemed inconsistent when I read these articles. Thanks for clearing it up.

[Firefly]

I may be wrong but I believe the correct form of addressing a U.S. President is "Mr. President/Mr. [insert last name]" OR "President [last name]". Either are correct and proper manners. George Washington himself started this practice as the official form of address because he believed a president should be addressed as an equal citizen (as opposed to being addressed "His Highness" or whathaveyou). At least this is what I've always been taught. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

[Joanne]

They did it to Bush also. In fact, I remember threads here complaining of that very thing. I agree that the office deserves the title, regardless of who is currently in it.

 

Kim

 

This. I remember it first registering for me with former President Clinton. I didn't respect him as a man *or* President but I remember thinking calling him "Mr" instead of "President" was disrespectul to the office.

 

It's a change from when I was younger but definitely happened before President Obama took office.

[ereks mom]

I agree. I also think it happens to writers when they have to use a title often in their articles. They switch it up for variety. I'm not sure I would read that much into it. I remember it happening to Bush too.

 

 

And as another poster said, it's all in the name of a more casual attitude and less formality throughout society.

[Jumping In Puddles]

This has been the way for as long as I can remember.

 

To find an example, I googled a random date when I know GWB was pres (may 9, 2003) and clicked on a random article and came up with this:

 

link:

 

On a day when the Senate unanimously approved adding seven former Communist-bloc nations to NATO, President Bush accelerated the White House effort today to reward his allies in the Iraq war and by omission to show his displeasure with those who opposed him.

 

Mr. Bush invited the foreign ministers of the seven nations for a private chat in the Roosevelt Room ...

 

If they are talking about foreign presidents, they do the same thing.

[TXMary2]

I've read two articles today (NYT and MSNBC) that refer to him only as Mr. Obama. Is this new or do I live under a rock? I don't recall previous presidents being called Mr.

 

I'm not trying to stir the pot. I'm really curious if it's always been this way and I've never noticed. It's certainly possible.

 

During GW's presidency it was always a beef of mine that they called him Mr. Bush. Very rarely did I hear the media (except FOX) call him Mr. President. They would refer to Clinton as President Clinton in the same sentence they used "Mr. Bush." So, this is nothing new and I am glad to hear it is happening to Obama too. Equal and fair don't you know.

[dcjlkplus3]

I remember it with Bush too. It is generally when they don't like some policy. I think it is very disrespectful. :glare:

 

What do you think would be a respectful way to identify the president if not by Mr.?

 

I have never heard pesident refered to otherwise, unless maybe being spoken directly to, in which case it is usually Mr. President.

[lionfamily1999]

Perry, it used to drive me NUTS to hear them call former President Bush, Mr. Bush. I don't remember former President Clinton being called Mr. Clinton, and I thought the same thing you do know, that it was strictly partisan rudeness. Apparently, it's not, it's just ignorant rudeness.:glare:

 

ETA, I guess it's a writing policy, and the same thing DID happen to Clinton. I still think it's rude though ;)

Edited July 18, 2009 by lionfamily1999

[abbeyej]

They did it to Bush also. In fact, I remember threads here complaining of that very thing.

 

Yep! I remember those threads too! I think it has more to do with a general increasing laxness in our speech and manners rather than an attempt to denigrate any one single person or political figure.

[Dirtroad]

I don't remember Bush being referred to in this way during his presidency. It is a not-so-subtle way to demote him from role of President to ordinary citizen, imho.

 

Haha... no, they refered to Bush as "Dubya".... he didn't even get the mister part! It is still used.

[Perry]

Yep! I remember those threads too! I think it has more to do with a general increasing laxness in our speech and manners rather than an attempt to denigrate any one single person or political figure.

 

 

I found an interesting article on NPR about this:

"NPR has used Mister as the alternative term of respect on second (and subsequent) reference to the President of the United States for decades. I personally have been Washington editor for three presidents and we have done it consistently through this time. Just as consistent have been the letters, phone calls and emails from people who do not believe what I just said. They insist we always called the previous president 'President So and So' on every reference and that our alleged failure to do so with the current president indicates disrespect. It is difficult to convince people their memories are faulty, and even transcripts sometimes do not convince them. One nice thing about the digital age is that people can actually go on line, call up actual audio from earlier this month, or last month, and hear us saying Mr. Bush, which we did every day."

So I guess I do live under a rock.

 

I hope this is okay to link. I think it's about journalism, not politics.

[Jumping In Puddles]

Haha... no, they refered to Bush as "Dubya".... he didn't even get the mister part! It is still used.

 

Better than "Bubba" :lol:

[Audrey]

They did it to Bush also. In fact, I remember threads here complaining of that very thing. I agree that the office deserves the title, regardless of who is currently in it.

 

Kim

 

 

Yes, I remember quite a few whine-fests on just that precisely. So, no. It isn't just this prez.

[Jumping In Puddles]

I remember it with Bush too. It is generally when they don't like some policy. I think it is very disrespectful. :glare:

 

No, it's whether they like a policy or not, whether they like a president or not. That is just the style but maybe you notice it more when you think a journalist doesn't like policy but that is not the reality.

[LUV2EDU]

This quote is from a 1987 article on President Ronald Reagan from The New York Times.

 

Quote:

 

"The visit to Washington by Mr. Gorbachev was the first by a Soviet leader since Leonid I. Brezhnev was here 14 years ago, and it took on immediate drama as Mr. Reagan, who entered office with deep suspicions of the Soviet Union, welcomed Mr. Gorbachev on the South Lawn of the White House."

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/09/politics/09REAG.html

[Laura Corin]

I know that it is the custom in the US to call the president President X, or Mr. President, but for another point of view:

 

In the UK the prime minister is always just called Mr. X, or The Prime Minister, never Mr. Prime Minister. There's no disrespect in calling him Mr. Any time the phrase 'Mr. Prime Minister' is used, we know that it's a foreigner talking.

 

I know that there is a difference in the roles or president and prime minister, and I wonder whether the US habit comes from the royal usage (don't throw rocks, I'm just musing). We have Queen Elizabeth, or The Queen, but never Mrs. Windsor.

 

Laura

[Kathy in MD]

And to add more confusion to the mix, a former senator may be addressed as Senator X and use the title wha siging papers, but a former president is not supposed to be addressed President X or use the title.