ABC News criticized for downplaying MS-13 by labeling gang a ‘clique’

Is ABC News playing word games with a deadly gang’s reputation? On Wednesday, the network sparked a firestorm on social media by labeling a faction of the notorious MS-13 as a mere “clique” in a post about a federal racketeering case, as the Western Journal reports.

The controversy erupted over ABC’s coverage of an MS-13 leader’s sentencing in a New York City suburb, tied to eight brutal murders, including the tragic 2016 deaths of two high school girls that shocked the nation.

Instead of calling MS-13 what it is — a violent transnational criminal organization — ABC opted for the softer term “clique,” as if describing a high school social circle. This choice didn’t just raise eyebrows; it ignited a backlash from commentators across the spectrum. Frankly, it’s hard to see this as anything but a deliberate attempt to soften the gang’s image.

Critics slam misleading description

Mollie Hemingway, editor-in-chief of The Federalist, didn’t hold back, blasting ABC for what she called “propaganda” and a “new low.” Her sharp critique suggests a growing frustration with media outlets that seem to prioritize narrative over reality.

Country music star John Rich piled on with biting sarcasm, referencing Webster’s definition of a clique as a tight-knit group with shared interests. He quipped that for MS-13, those interests appear to be “rape and murder.” Ouch — turns out word choice matters when lives are on the line.

Even everyday social media users couldn’t resist weighing in, with one comparing a “clique” to “middle school mean girls.” The question echoed loudly: What was ABC thinking with this bizarre framing?

Violent reality ignored

The case at the heart of this story is no laughing matter, involving eight murders that highlight MS-13’s ruthless operations. The 2016 killings of two young girls in particular drew national outrage, shining a spotlight on the gang’s savagery. ABC’s language, however, seems to dim that light.

This isn’t the first time media outlets have been accused of playing linguistic gymnastics to downplay serious issues. Critics point to a historical shift in terms, like moving from “illegal alien” to “undocumented person,” as evidence of a pattern that often aligns with progressive agendas. It’s a subtle but powerful way to shape public perception.

ABC’s post on X about the sentencing read in part that the leader of an MS-13 group faced charges for those horrific crimes. But by using “clique,” they’ve turned a gang into something almost quaint, hardly fitting for an organization linked to such violence.

Trump takes action

Adding context to MS-13’s dangerous reputation, President Donald Trump, upon returning to the White House, issued an executive order designating MS-13, along with groups like Tren de Aragua (TdA) and the Cartels, as terrorist organizations. This move underscores the severity of the threat these groups pose to national security.

The order pulls no punches, stating that Cartels control illegal border traffic through “assassination, terror, rape, and brute force.” It also notes their quasi-governmental control in parts of Mexico, painting a grim picture of their influence.

Furthermore, the order warns that these groups’ activities jeopardize the safety of Americans and the stability of the Western Hemisphere. MS-13 and TdA are called out as transnational threats with violent campaigns that rival the Cartels’ brutality.

National security at stake

The executive order emphasizes that these organizations operate both within and outside U.S. borders, posing an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to national security, foreign policy, and the economy. It’s a stark reminder of what’s at stake when media outlets choose fluff over facts.

While ABC News has every right to report as it sees fit, the backlash over this word choice reflects a deeper concern about trust in journalism. If a gang responsible for heinous crimes can be reduced to a “clique,” what else might be softened for the sake of a narrative? Perhaps it’s time for some hard reflection in the newsroom.

In the end, the story isn’t just about a poorly chosen word—it’s about accountability in how we describe the world’s harsh realities. MS-13’s victims deserve better than euphemisms, and so do the American people. Let’s hope this serves as a wake-up call to prioritize truth over optics.