Using the c-word
Earlier this week, MSNBC/NBC News made a highly-publicized announcement of its decision to refer to Iraq as a civil war. Several media outlets have adopted the term, still others flatly reject it, and most remain on the fence. Will there be a domino effect in the upcoming days and weeks? Here's a quick round-up of ...
Earlier this week, MSNBC/NBC News made a highly-publicized announcement of its decision to refer to Iraq as a civil war. Several media outlets have adopted the term, still others flatly reject it, and most remain on the fence. Will there be a domino effect in the upcoming days and weeks? Here's a quick round-up of some official stances so far:
Earlier this week, MSNBC/NBC News made a highly-publicized announcement of its decision to refer to Iraq as a civil war. Several media outlets have adopted the term, still others flatly reject it, and most remain on the fence. Will there be a domino effect in the upcoming days and weeks? Here's a quick round-up of some official stances so far:
For:
MSNBC/NBC News: "with armed militarized factions fighting for their own political agendas, [Iraq] can now be characterized as civil war".
LA Times: One of the first newspapers to flatly describe the conflict as a "civil war".
New York Times: Decided to use the term "sparingly and carefully, not to the exclusion of other formulations, not for dramatic effect".
Christian Science Monitor: Refers to Iraq as a "deepening civil war".
Fareed Zakaria and Jonathan Alter of Newsweek: "Calling it what it is… It shouldn't have taken so long."
McClatchy newspapers: Includes the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the Sacramento Bee.
Against:
BBC – Its reasoning:
There is no single picture in Iraq – no single term can do justice to the complexity of what's going on there. For now, we've decided not to use the term civil war – not because the situation isn't bad, nor life for those involved increasingly difficult. Others will continue to describe it as a "civil war" – we'll continue to report their comments with attribution. But it's precisely because things are critical, that we need to explain and provide the context – something, one simple phrase can never do.
Conspicuously absent:
ABC
CBS
CNN
Fox
Washington Post
Advocates of the term point to various academic requirements of a civil war, and insist that Iraq meets them all, while dissenters argue that not only are the requirements not yet met, but that using the term oversimplifies the complex conflict.
Email Passport with your views, or whether you know of any other media outlets taking a position.
More from Foreign Policy

Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.

Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.

It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.

Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.