Ethical Communications - Alternatives to “Third World”
A key issue in the international aid community has often been the level of ethical communication strategies and terminology used to communicate to audiences. In many ways, the international aid community uses communication with the intent for good (development and donor assistance), but to specific audiences, the use of particular terms in communication may do more harm than good.
The term “third world” has become a popular phrase to describe a collective of states who do not meet certain “economic standard” of the West. When we hear the term ‘third world’ in the media, we know what is meant by it – countries that lack the wealth of first world nations, countries with weak healthcare and have unstable governments. Yet, the very term “third world” is problematic today, specifically if used continuously within aid organizations.
Dating back to the Cold War, when the world was separated between Western Capitalism and Soviet Communism, nations such as United States and Western Europe were seen as first world.[1] China and its counterparts were seen as second world, and all other nations that could not be grouped we categorized as third world. Over the years, the term ‘third world’ is made up of negative stereotypes that are very old-fashioned in today’s society.
The assumption that people who live in the ‘first world’ are in a utopian culture with no struggles or instability is out-of-date. In fact, what would be considered ‘third world’ in the past, now has multi-faceted layers today. It no longer covers a country’s economic status and healthcare rather, overall social wellbeing and livelihood. We are currently seeing pockets of deep urban and rural poverty, wars and human rights abuse in “first world” nations. Wealthy nations are also having looming economic and health problems today. Do we then include them in the category? As organizations that have offices in North America and Europe, do we classify our partner communities in Africa, Asia and the like as third world? This unfortunately will breed an “us vs them” culture which long term, will be detrimental to the very communities we aim to support.
There has to be an appropriate alternative to the term “third world” when communicating with audiences.
Mamboma_ACT-Women showing high resilence against the rain by collecting gravels in their quest to complete the skill training center project.
Although other terminologies such as “developing countries” may seem like a better choice, it still perpetuates the idea that western states are ideal and promotes a negative hierarchal system between nations. The truth is, society has been accustomed to sweeping labels and categorization which is detrimental to the social livelihoods in many communities.
So, what is an alternative the term ‘third world’?
At OneVillage Partners, we believe the alternative to the term “third world” is specificity. If we are to capture and share stories of our partner communities, we must be truthful by naming the country itself and not categorize a whole continent.
If the term ‘third world’ is hard to not say, it may be a better alternative to just call the country by its name.
[1] https://borgenproject.org/alternative-to-third-world/ , https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/01/08/954820328/memo-to-people-of-earth-third-world-is-an-offensive-term