explainer
columns
- How To Make a Skull Bong
A guide for the ultimate deadhead.
Arthur Delaney
posted May 9, 2008 - Burma vs. Myanmar
Why can't the newspapers just pick a name and go with it?
Chris Wilson
posted May 8, 2008 - Can a Campaign Go Bankrupt?
What happens to Hillary Clinton's debt when the primaries are over?
Jacob Leibenluft
posted May 7, 2008 - Who Owns a Suicide Note?
How the D.C. Madam's last words made it into the newspaper.
Juliet Lapidos
posted May 6, 2008 - The Unpopular President
Why was Harry Truman as unloved as George W. Bush?
Jacob Leibenluft
posted May 5, 2008 - Search for more explainer articles
- Subscribe to the explainer RSS feed
- View our complete explainer archive
Burma vs. MyanmarWhy can't the newspapers just pick a name and go with it?
By Chris WilsonPosted Thursday, May 8, 2008, at 6:28 PM ET

The front page of today's New York Times declares, "Myanmar Junta Accused of Delay in Storm Relief," while the Washington Post's front page reports there is "Scant Aid Reaching Burma's Delta." The papers are referring to the same devastating cyclone that tore through the Texas-size nation south of China and northwest of Thailand, whose ruling military junta changed the country's name from Burma to Myanmar in 1989. How do newspapers decide which name to use?
Some err on the side of letting the country itself decide, while others don't. On the Burma/Myanmar question, both newspapers and countries are divided over whether to recognize the switcheroo. Burma's military leaders changed the English-language version of the country's name to Myanmar in 1989, based on the short version of the country's name in Burmese, "Myanma Naingngandaw." While the United Nations adopted the new name in June of that year, the United States continues to call the country Burma because the change was never ratified by a legislative body in the country.
The Associated Press adopted "Myanmar" into its 2006 Stylebook, after weighing such factors as widespread international use and its recognition by the United Nations. The Times, on the other hand, has an informal policy of going with whatever the country wishes to be called, so long as the new name appears to have stuck; it began referring to the nation of Myanmar back in 1989. Five years earlier, the paper immediately adopted Upper Volta's change to Bourkina Fasso, declaring in an Aug. 5 headline that "Upper Volta, At Fete, Vows To Do Better As Bourkina Fasso." (The name of that nation is now more commonly spelled "Burkina Faso.")
Meanwhile, the Post tends to consult National Geographic in these decisions, though this case is an exception; National Geographic currently lists the country as "Myanmar (Burma)." The Post originally chose not to accept "Myanmar" because the military junta had not been recognized by many nations as a legitimate governing body. Slate uses "Burma" for similar reasons.
While most newspapers use the Associated Press Stylebook as a guideline for usage decisions, they also have an in-house process for arbitrating style quandaries. This is presided over by a "style czar," usually the copy desk chief or someone he or she designates, who consults knowledgeable staff members and outside experts with relevant experience.
Because different papers choose to adopt name changes at different times, it's common for those that use the new name to remind readers somewhere in the article that the country used to be called something else. In its entry on "Myanmar," The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage urges editors to "[g]racefully remind readers of the former names when necessary" and states that "Burmese" is still informally acceptable as a noun or adjective referring to the people. This practice is likely to remain as long as there is significant dispute over the name.
Country name changes are not as common as they used to be, though there was considerable confusion in 2006 when newspapers couldn't agree on whether the city formerly known as Bombay should now be called Mumbai. Because name changes are frequently the result of a nation shedding its colonial or Soviet heritage, the decision on whether to accept them can be politically sensitive. The Times was initially criticized for adopting Myanmar too readily, though several other large publications, such as the Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal, have now followed suit.
Got a question about today's news? Ask the Explainer.
Explainer thanks Scott Bosley of the American Society of Newspaper Editors, David Minthorn of the Associated Press, Don Podesta of the Washington Post, and Craig Whitney of the New York Times.
feedback | about us | help | advertise | newsletters | mobile
User Agreement and Privacy Policy | All rights reserved
- Today's Headlines
- [audio] Rubik's Cube Solved With Hammer
Mon, 12 May 2008 01:00:36 -0400 - Optimism Can't Beat Cancer
Mon, 12 May 2008 01:00:33 -0400 - Undercover Fireman Infiltrates Three-Alarm Blaze
Mon, 12 May 2008 01:00:03 -0400 - » More from the Onion
- Today's Opinions
- McCain's Christian Problem
Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT - In Burma, a U.N. Promise Not Kept
Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT - Priority: Statehood
Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT - » More from washingtonpost.com
- Today's Headlines
- Sit Back, Relax, Get Ready to Rumble
Sat, 10 May 2008 19:51:32 GMT - Shimon Peres: ‘Practically All of Us Were Hawks’
Sat, 10 May 2008 19:57:28 GMT - Newt Gingrich: Dear Senator Obama …
Sat, 10 May 2008 17:58:20 GMT - » More from Newsweek
- Today's Headlines
- The Last Hug
Fri, 9 May 2008 20:03:50 GMT - Grounded: Conversations on The Root
Wed, 7 May 2008 18:55:35 GMT - Viva Vogue Italia!
Thu, 8 May 2008 18:17:41 GMT - » More from The Root

explainer









