US diplomats are going back to using Times New Roman for official documents. This shift was prompted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who criticized the previous decision to switch to Calibri font, calling it “wasteful.” An internal memo revealed that Rubio believes typography should reflect professionalism, and Calibri feels too casual compared to serif fonts like Times New Roman.
In 2023, the State Department adopted Calibri, saying it was more accessible for people with disabilities. Some studies suggest that sans-serif fonts can be easier to read for those with visual impairments. The previous secretary, Antony Blinken, championed this move, emphasizing inclusivity.
However, the latest cable from the State Department stated that the switch to Times New Roman would help restore decorum and professionalism. It aligns with President Biden’s “One Voice for America’s Foreign Relations” directive, aiming for a unified message in all diplomatic communications.
The debate over fonts mirrors a larger cultural conversation around diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Following the protests in 2020 against racial injustice, DEI programs gained traction. Critics argue these initiatives can lead to bias against white individuals, while supporters believe they’re essential for addressing systemic inequalities.
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time Times New Roman has been the preferred choice for formal documents. Historically, it has been the staple font for government and academic publications. Its enduring presence reflects a desire for tradition, particularly in diplomatic communications.
Overall, the change in font highlights differing views on professionalism, inclusivity, and the role of tradition in official communications. As the conversation continues, it’s clear that typography isn’t just about style; it’s about what messages we send and how we choose to represent our values.
For further context, you can check this article from The Guardian which discusses font choices in more detail here.
