Political labels
Labels can be a useful signpost to the audience to help understanding of politics in the UK and around the world. While still widely used, the existence of a clear left-right political spectrum is not as widely recognised or accepted as it has been in the past. Political labels should be used with care.
While parties may be generally described as being broadly on the left, right or centre of British politics, we do not usually apply left-right political labels directly to the main political parties in the UK. Saying Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Reform UK or Green, is usually sufficient for a UK audience. The SNP and Plaid Cymru can be described as nationalist parties. Labels can also be helpful in describing the nationalist or unionist position of parties in Northern Ireland. Particular care is needed where a label is contested and not accepted by political opponents. Where space allows, it is preferable to refer to the specific policies and outlook of a party.
Political labels can be used when describing the different groupings and policy debates within a party, where it cannot be assumed there is an understanding of the relative position of politicians and internal groupings. Again, care is needed where a particular label is contested.
In all cases, the bar is high for using "far-right" or "far-left" without attribution. These terms can be used with attribution, or where there is clear evidence a party or politician is operating outside democratic norms. The BBC has described Tommy Robinson, for example, as "far-right".
"Populist" describes an anti-establishment political style, rather than a specific ideology. We should consider whether the term adds clarity, as it may be perceived as carrying negative undertones, implying a party is playing on fears or prejudices, rather than offering substantive policies. When used it should be applied consistently to parties with similar styles. Care is also needed with use of the term "progressive", which may be perceived as carrying positive connotations.
The emergence of new political groups can present a challenge. Descriptions like "independent MPs" sometimes omit their shared political positions and level of co-ordination. In such cases, a descriptor, like "pro-Gaza independent MPs", may be helpful, although we need to be aware that a group’s positions may change over time and members may disagree on a range of other policies.
Where labels are used, we need to achieve due impartiality between rival parties or groups. Terms such as "anti-fascist" can carry an implicit endorsement. Describing one group as "anti-racism protesters" while counter-protesters are labelled "far-right activists", risks creating an asymmetry between values and ideology. It is better to describe both groups by reference to their demands, or as counter-protesters. In addition, audiences may be misled if the political affiliations of protest organisers are not mentioned. We should avoid defining a protest by its most extreme participants.
Labels are used in European politics and in the BBC’s coverage, where they can be useful in explaining unfamiliar parties, complex coalition politics, and the different groupings in the European Parliament. Some European countries have an established presence of parties at the far ends of the political spectrum, but new parties may defy easy classification. Parties and their leaders can evolve, becoming more moderate, or extreme, over time. Where a party’s popularity increases, it can influence the wider political debate and the positions of rival parties. Policies previously considered extreme may come to be viewed as part of the mainstream debate. Labels should be used with care and reflect a party or leader’s current position, as well as their historical roots.
When using the labels "far-right" or "far-left", we should provide context on why it is editorially justified and consider whether other terms, including "nationalist", "anti-immigration", or "communist" are more informative. "Hard-right" or "hard-left" may be more accurate if the party is widely considered to be within the political mainstream, with, for example, other parties willing to work with them in government or parliament.
The approach taken to European politics also applies to other political groupings and leaders around the world, where the audience may be unfamiliar with the political context. This is particularly the case at election times, when audiences may not have a clear understanding of the relative positions of parties and labels can provide a useful shorthand guide.
For the United States, the difference between the Republican and Democratic Party is sufficiently well understood for further political labels to be unnecessary in most cases. However, US media does frequently use political labels and we should not adopt partisan language without attribution. Clarity is needed where labels, like "liberal", have different meanings in the US and UK context. US terms, such as "Alt-right", are not likely to be well understood and it may be better to describe specific views and attitudes. As elsewhere, use of "far-right" without attribution needs to clear a high bar.
