Also written: Inner city, Inner-city
| Source | Year | Position |
|---|---|---|
| SumOfUs | 2016 | Avoid |
| Color of Change | 2020 | Avoid |
| Global Center for Journalism & Trauma | 2021 | Avoid |
| NABJ | 2022 | Avoid |
| American Psychological Association | 2023 | Avoid |
| Diversity Style Guide | 2023 | Avoid |
“Terms avoided/questioned by racial justice activists: … ghetto (especially as an adv. or adj.) …”
SumOfUs lists "ghetto" among terms avoided or questioned by racial justice activists, flagging it especially as an adverb or adjective. Its housing section draws a finer line — historical and identity-claiming uses can illuminate injustice, while adjectival use is the questioned form.
“Ghetto is a racist and classist term that has become shorthand for a poor and Black neighborhood that white people should disparage, dismiss and fear. … It should not be used by people who do not live in those communities, not even in jest or for "ironic" effect.”
Color of Change calls "ghetto" a racist and classist term that has become shorthand for a poor, Black neighborhood — one that lets society neglect or punish Black families. It says the word should not be used by people who do not live in those communities, even ironically.
“In general, do not use "ghetto", or related adjectives such as "notorious", "urban" and "gritty," to describe a geographic area. These cliches are often euphemisms for race. Avoid perpetuating negative stereotypes by describing a neighborhood or other area with precision. …”
The Global Center for Journalism & Trauma traces "ghetto" from sixteenth-century Venice through the Holocaust to today's segregated, low-income U.S. neighborhoods, and directs writers not to use it — or related cliches like "notorious," "urban," and "gritty" — because they are often euphemisms for race.
“ghetto, inner city: Terms used as synonyms for sections of cities inhabited by poor people or minorities. Avoid these descriptions because of their negative connotations. Often the name of the neighborhood is the best choice. Section, district or quarter may also be used.”
NABJ is the upstream entry DSG carries forward, and its distinctive move is yoking "ghetto" to "inner city" — flagging the polite-sounding substitute as the same euphemism, not a safe replacement. The constructive half is concrete: reach for the neighborhood's actual name first, with "section," "district," or "quarter" as neutral fallbacks.
“ghetto/the ghetto → underresourced area. … It also has roots in antisemitism. The colloquial use of the term "ghetto" to describe others is rooted in classism and racism.”
APA's second edition places "ghetto" in its Socioeconomic Status avoid table, suggesting "underresourced area" or "low socioeconomic area" instead. It notes the word's roots in antisemitism and observes that colloquial use of "ghetto" to describe others is rooted in classism and racism.
“Term used as a synonyms for sections of cities inhabited by poor people or minorities. Avoid this term because of its negative connotations. Often the name of the neighborhood is the best choice. Section, district or quarter may also be used.”
DSG reproduces NABJ's guidance nearly word-for-word but splits the paired "ghetto, inner city" entry into a single-term one (its source URL still reads ghetto-inner-city). The substance is identical — avoid for the negative connotations, prefer the neighborhood's name or "section," "district," "quarter" — so on this page it stands as the journalism-style consensus rather than a separate argument.
“Ghetto” is rejected across the corpus as a descriptor, and the same entry covers its companion “inner city.” APA places “ghetto” in its avoid table and suggests “underresourced area.” Color of Change calls it “a racist and classist term” that has become shorthand for a poor, Black neighborhood. GCJT says not to use it. NABJ and the Diversity Style Guide each file “ghetto” and “inner city” in a single entry as synonyms for “sections of cities inhabited by poor people or minorities,” to be avoided for their negative connotations. The recommended replacements are concrete: the neighborhood’s actual name, or neutral terms like “section,” “district,” “quarter,” or “under-resourced area.”
The shared objection is that these words are euphemisms for race. GCJT names the pattern directly: “ghetto,” along with “notorious,” “urban,” and “gritty,” works as code for race. The Diversity Style Guide’s “inner city” entry points writers toward “city center,” “downtown,” or “central urban” for geography and “low-income” or “under-resourced” for poverty. That is why this page sits beside urban, which carries the fuller treatment of the coded-language pattern, and why the rejection is about precision: describe the actual neighborhood rather than reaching for a loaded shorthand.
The corpus does mark a boundary around reclamation and history. APA notes the word’s roots in antisemitism (the original Venetian ghetto) before its application to segregated U.S. neighborhoods. SumOfUs accepts historical and identity-claiming uses that illuminate injustice while flagging the adjectival use as the questioned form. Color of Change is most pointed about who is speaking: the word “should not be used by people who do not live in those communities, not even in jest or for ‘ironic’ effect.” The guidance is stable from SumOfUs (2016) through the 2020–2023 guides. This page pairs with urban, classism, and disadvantaged.