La Opinión is the dean of America's Spanish-language dailies, dating back to the 1930s. Its owners, the Lozano family, are tireless advocates of Latinos, and the paper's Pilar Marrero is one of Southern California's best political reporters, damn the language.
But their coverage of the Tan Nguyen scandal (read previous Blotter posts below) is inconsistent when considering the infamous letter's most infamous passage--that illegal immigrants and resident aliens can't vote. The Spanish-language letter states, "Se le avisa que si su residencia en este país es ilegal o si es emigrado, votar en una eleción federal es un delito que podrá resultar en encarcelamientó, y sí sera deportado por votar sin tener derecho a ello ("You are advised that if your residence in this country is illegal or you are a non-citizen immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time, and you will be deported for voting without having a right to do so.")
However, in this article, Opinión writer Araceli Martínez Ortega writes that the Nguyen letter says, "Estás advertido que si tu residencia en este país es ilegal o eres un inmigrante, votar en una elección federal es un crimen que puede dar como resultado la cárcel." And in this second story, Martínez Ortega says the letter (sent to 14,000 Latinos in the 46th Congressional District) reads, "Te advertimos que si tu residencia en este país es ilegal o si eres un inmigrante, votar en una elección federal es un crimen que puede resultar en cárcel." This article, however, has it right.
We're not going to translate the Martínez Ortega's two versions (mix-and-match with the original Spanish above!), 'cause it essentially translates word-for-word, sentiment for sentiment. Except for one word--inmigrante. Means immigrant, of course. But the original said emigrado.
So why the change? As reported earlier, emigrado refers to immigrants who are legal but not citizens; inmigrante refers to immigrants without distinction to legal status. The original letter tells readers non-citizens can't vote; La Opinión's version spins it so that readers think even former immigrants who are now citizens can't vote.
You can excuse the English-language press for mistranslation--we're just a bunch of gabachos y pochos, after all. But why would La Opinión change the content of Nguyen's letter. Honest mistake (twice)--or deliberate misdirection?
P.S. to Adam Probolsky: Cut the "Tan was a Dem" shit out. Readers: Probolsky said that in the first Opinión article. And same goes to the rest of the Republicans who are saying this (that's you, Chuck Devore). Ustedes weren't saying that before Nguyen turned stupid.
UPDATE: Today's Opinión article on Nguyen has yet another offering of the letter, this one now stating, "un residente con la tarjeta verde (green card) (a resident with a green card). But the letter said no such thing. Implied? Sure. But why not just print what the original letter said, not implied? Or is the nation's most prestigious Spanish-language paper in need of a Real Academia Español dictionary?
October 22, 2006 22:10
I like your attention to detail on this.
Back to the blogs - some fun.
October 23, 2006 00:10
Very interesting!
I have a good friend who's an immigration lawyer in OC. We were talking about this story on Saturday, and he remarked that in US law individuals have only two statuses: citizen and alien. US law does not recognize the status of "immigrant." (I believe he also said aliens can be either undocumented, permanent residents, or temporary residents.)
I'm not sure this has any relevance, since I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds to me it may not matter -- legally -- what form of the word "immigrant" was used.
October 23, 2006 05:10
[...] Why is La Opinion Changing the Tan Nguyen Letter? [...]
October 23, 2006 15:10
[...] Listening to L.A.'s favorite boors and heard Tan Nguyen will appear this Wednesday–maybe an in-studio appearance. As a preview of what may come, JohnKen spelled out Nguyen's last name to their listeners. JohnKen also praised my earlier post examining La Opinión's translation games, then went on to blast the "activist" who offered his Spanish translation services to Nguyen at yesterday's press conference . Um, pendejos: That was me. [...]
October 23, 2006 18:10
"But why not just print what the original letter said, not implied?"
Because they are trying to score political points? Just a thought.
October 23, 2006 22:10
Gustavo, I appreciate your post and your ongoing reporting – it shows increasingly why good journalism is becoming the exception. (And, congratulations on your recent L.A Times Op-Ed, by the way, I've tried for 21 years and have yet to place an Op-Ed in that paper.)
I can also appreciate your comment about Adam Probolsky and me regarding our "Tan was a Dem" comments. Please allow me to be very clear about the rationale for my comments and the likely reason for Adam's as well.
Tan Nguyen tried to run against Cong. Dana Rohrabacher two years ago and lost the Democrat primary. He switched party registration 10 months ago. Since then, the county GOP has seen very little of Mr. Nguyen except when it came to campaign events that benefited his candidacy. The non-support of Mr. Nguyen by the county GOP establishment speaks volumes for our unease over the underlying reasons for Mr. Nguyen's candidacy.
Let's face it. Political veterans are very familiar with this variety of wannabe. They breeze into politics, throw some cash around, and expect instant results. On the national level, Mr. Nguyen gave $750 to Wesley Clark, $500 to John Kerry, and $750 to the Democrat National Committee in 2003-04. When the Democrats did not ride to his aid in 2004 in the primary in Cong. Rohrabacher's seat, he switched horses. Had Mr. Nguyen took an extra couple of years to establish himself, attend a few events, walk a few precincts, etc., then we'd feel ownership and, frankly, more embarrassment. But he didn't, so we don't.
All the best,
Chuck DeVore
State Assemblyman, 70th District
www.ChuckDeVore.com
October 24, 2006 13:10
Chuck and Adam should be reminded that Tan WON his Republican primary election, while never mentioning that he LOST his Democratic primary.
Saying that Mr. Nguyen only recently became a Republican is one thing, but constantly referring to him as a "former Democrat" is really just an attempt to spin. And a weak one at that.
But I hesitate to expect honesty from Mr. Devore who has yet to admit he was wrong to point the finger at Dems for this letter.
Unfortunately, Chuck, when your attitude is "win at any cost," everyone loses.
October 25, 2006 17:10
The emigrado thing, imigrante thing, etc. is just a smokescreen, folks. Fact is, being an immigrant/emigrant has nothing to do with it. Citizens can vote, aliens can't. What the letter states is that if a person has emigrated, or if they have immigrated, they can't vote. Why people get so confused about that is due to just one thing -- they want to be confused, and they want to obfuscate the issue, either to others or to their own selves.
October 26, 2006 17:10
Mexicans can't speak Spanish. Maybe that's why they can't figure out the difference between immigrante and emigrado. Gabacho means a Frenchman, capullo!
April 23, 2007 15:04
Fioricet and blood work....
Fioricet and blood work....
May 31, 2007 18:05
in Germany and then in the United States