Last week, several Korean media outlets published articles using the word “apocalypse” in their headlines. The reports described U.S. citizens in Florida participating in firearms training to prepare for crises such as natural disasters, pandemics, or war.
However, the original reporting was not done by Korean journalists on the ground. The stories were translated from The New York Times.
Translation Practice Under Scrutiny
Many of these translated articles closely mirrored the original piece in tone, structure, and content. However, one recurring phrase stood out:
“According to The New York Times, gun ownership, once considered the domain of far-right groups, is now gaining broader acceptance.”
This translation is problematic. In today’s context—where even prominent Democrats like Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and Vice President Kamala Harris are known gun owners—the phrase “far-right groups” feels misplaced. The original New York Times article made no such claim.
Upon reviewing the original New York Times article, no such phrase appears. The term “far-right” was never used. Instead, the article referred only to “right-wing” individuals. Some Korean media outlets independently altered the language during translation, choosing to insert “far-right” on their own.
While the broader context of the article may imply a shift in public attitudes toward gun ownership—traditionally associated with conservative politics—the direct use of the term “far-right” is an editorial interpretation by the translator, not a reflection of the source material.
Media Studies Highlight Language Bias
This issue isn’t isolated. A 2022 study by David Rozado, a data scientist, and Eric Kaufmann, professor at Buckingham University, examined over 30 million articles across 54 news outlets. The study analyzed the frequency of politically extreme labels like “far-right” and “far-left.”
In the 1970s, The New York Times and The Washington Post used both terms at similar rates. But beginning in the 1980s, the use of “far-right” increased dramatically—appearing three times more often than “far-left.”
This disparity grew sharper in the 2000s. From 2008 to 2014, “far-right” usage rose by 243% in The New York Times and 359% in The Washington Post. Between 2015 and 2019, the figures increased by another 260% and 128%, respectively.
The study links this rise to shifting newsroom ideologies and growing emphasis on social justice discourse. It attributes the trend in part to the increasing number of progressive elites entering the journalism profession, which has tilted editorial norms.
Political Repercussions in the U.S.
Concerns about media bias have also reached the U.S. Congress. In a March 2025 House hearing, Representative Pat Fallon (R-Texas) questioned PBS President Paula Kerger on why the network used “far-right” 96% of the time versus just 4% for “far-left” in its reports between June and November 2023. Kerger did not provide a strong rebuttal.
Fallon also pointed to the political affiliations of NPR reporters, telling NPR CEO Katherine Maher that the absence of any registered Republicans at the outlet made it appear as if “Democrats have turned you into their propaganda wing.”
Added Distortion in Korean Reporting
Even more concerning, some Korean media outlets not only rely on these skewed reports but further twist the translations. By inserting politically charged terms like “far-right” without accurate context, they risk misleading Korean readers about American political dynamics.
The misuse of the ‘far-right’ label is not the core issue. The real problem is a media culture that distorts language and, in doing so, distorts public understanding.
BY YEOL JANG [jang.yeol@koreadaily.com]
