In today’s age, it’s no secret that every facet of our lives—big or small—is under constant scrutiny for its political undertones. Enter the latest headline from the New York Post: Secretary of State Marco Rubio has instructed diplomats to return to using Times New Roman font, undoing a Biden-era decision. What sounds like a minor aesthetic choice has stirred up conversations about how even fonts can carry ideological weight.
Let’s start by examining what Rubio’s decision signifies. On the surface, changing a font might seem inconsequential. However, the subtle shift from Calibri, a modern and softer typeface, back to the classic, bold Times New Roman is about more than just aesthetics. It’s a statement against what some perceive as an era of unnecessary complexity and lack of substance. Times New Roman evokes a sense of tradition, strength, and clarity—attributes that Rubio likely wishes to project during uncertain times.
Historically, the choice of font can indeed set the mood and tone of a document. Just as an author chooses a style that complements their narrative, a government can set an atmosphere through their communication’s visual presentation. Rubio’s decision could be interpreted as an attempt to convey a return to fundamentals and to create an environment where messages are clear, unambiguous, and devoid of frills.
Critics might argue that focusing on such matters during pressing times is misplaced energy. Yet, defying expectations, small details like these contribute to the broader presentation and perception of leadership and governance. It’s reminiscent of the broken windows theory: attending to minor details can prevent larger issues from escalating. Setting a tone of discipline and classic stability can affect the mindset and morale of those who engage with these communications daily.
Beyond typefaces, Rubio’s move reflects a broader cultural and political pushback against over-complication and an embrace of simplicity and familiarity. This sentiment echoes in personal lives too; just as Jordan Peterson advocates the importance of everyday actions over rare luxuries, this move underscores the value of revisiting and appreciating enduring practices that form the backbone of effective communication.
In essence, while the choice of Times New Roman may seem trivial to some, it’s a reminder that in politics—and life—style, substance, and symbols matter. These aspects shape perceptions, influence behaviors, and as such, are worthy of consideration by lawmakers and citizens alike. Whether we agree with Rubio or not, recognizing the role of subtlety in governance can encourage us to look beyond the obvious and question the underlying messages in all aspects of our world.
