ThE sTaFf oF mOtHeR jOnEs iS vErY dIvIdEd OvEr CoViD cApItAlIzAtIoN. HeLp.

COVID, Covid, covid, CoViD? Cast your vote.

Mother Jones illustration

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It started as a simple question from two Mother Jones editors: Should we, once and for all, drop the all-caps fuss and change COVID to Covid? What’s stopping us?

Science is stopping us. Acronyms are stopping us. I’m stopping us.

Or so I thought. COVID, short for CO(rona) VI(rus) D(isease)-(20)19, passes the same test we’d apply to anything else: IS IT AN ACRONYM? Drop it if it’s not. But when this question reached me last week from Kiera Butler, our senior editor in charge of pandemic reporting, a year and a half after another colleague asked it, I was surprised to learn how far Covid casualness has traveled. The New York Times, CNN, Politico, the Guardian, the Wall Street Journal, Wired, and a number of others go Covid. And Mother Jones long ago made -19 optional, so why not cool the caps and follow the pack?

Because we still capitalize acronyms.

Pedantry alone won’t settle this question, and we’ll want your vote at the bottom of this post. But search the archives and you’ll see how malleable the media is, how contested and cherry-picked the capitalization convention has always been, and how murky the lines are. Why, if COVID were the clear choice, would so many newsrooms change it to Covid but not AIDS to Aids despite both diseases having enormous societal impact, vast familiarity, and acronym roots? Why lowercase laser, radar, scuba, each an acronym?

In this minor debate is the mark of a meaningful fissure. Dueling impressions have taken hold that while one is consistent, the other is refreshingly informal. And the imperatives of social media erode conventional newsroom wisdom. So which should prevail?

We put this question to Mother Jones staff in a survey over several days, laying out the cases for and against and laying bare the competing assumptions. After a neck-and-neck start, Covid has taken the lead:

But the counterexample of AIDS presents a challenge. Here there's a practical point: the need to distinguish from a preexisting word. "Aids" in any sentence where it tracks as the verb gives assistance would obscure clarity. "Covid" never could.

Nor is clarity lost when, say, Dreamer replaces DREAMer, the clunkier mixed-case derivation of the legislative acronym. Our style guide carves out that exception. And some newsrooms draw arbitrary cutoffs for capitalization after four letters. The more you look for consistency, the less you find it. Which explains this chasm in media:

Covid
The New York Times, CNN, Politico, the Guardian, the Wall Street Journal, NBC News, the Intercept, Wired

COVID
The New Yorker, the Atlantic, the Los Angeles Times, the Associated Press, New York magazine, Vice, BuzzFeed News, The Root, NPR, CBS News, ABC News, the San Francisco Chronicle, the 19th News

covid (lowercase-c)
The Washington Post

As my colleague Kiera ponders, “Maybe the Post’s style of ‘covid’ actually does make sense, if you think about chickenpox, measles, polio, rabies, coronavirus, all lowercase." (The difference: None are acronyms. COVID is.)

The plot thickens when you jump overseas to the UK, where it’s commonplace to capitalize the first letter of acronyms pronounced as words, like “Nasa, Unicef and, now, Covid-19,” says the Guardian’s global readers’ editor, Elisabeth Ribbans.

But as our staff survey winds down, our reader poll opens up. Weigh in below or email styleguide@motherjones.com, and we'll take your vote on board when our copy council, in lab coats, doles out a verdict:

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate