Connect with us

COMMENTARY

‘Will Not Tolerate’: New York Times Warns Its Own Journalists After Intense Criticism of Its Reporting on Transgender People

Published

on

The New York Times is under fire for the second day in a row over its coverage of transgender people – now for its response to the criticism of its coverage of transgender people, and also its warning to its own journalists made by the Old Gray Lady’s executive editor.

On Wednesday, two very separate, yet damning letters were sent to The Times. One, an open letter signed by nearly 200 current and former Times contributors, criticized the paper’s coverage of transgender people. It was not only fact-based and chock-full of examples, but it also took a deep dive into The Times’ biased history of poor reporting on LGBTQ people overall.

The second open letter came from 100 or more LGBTQ organizations and leaders, including GLAAD and HRC, also criticizing the paper’s coverage of transgender people. While there were some similarities to both letters, they were clearly unrelated and from very different groups.

READ MORE: Attorney Behind Texas Vigilante Abortion Ban Drafting Similar Book Ban Bill to Sue Librarians: Report

Wednesday afternoon, The Times sent a statement to several publications that had reported on one or both letters. It accomplished being both defensive and dismissive. Rather than acknowledging any room for opportunity or growth, rather than welcoming honest criticism and offering to sit down with LGBTQ people or groups, The Times’ statement chalked up its biased coverage to having a different “mission” than GLAAD.

“We understand how GLAAD sees our coverage. But at the same time, we recognize that GLAAD’s advocacy mission and The Times’s journalistic mission are different,” the Times’ response from a spokesperson reads.

On Thursday, rather than take some time to review its policies on its coverage, or even its “journalistic mission,” The Times published an opinion piece defending one of the people accused of being anti-transgender, noted author J.K. Rowling.

Regardless of your opinion of Rowling, regardless of your opinion of her public statements about transgender people, publishing a defense of Rowling was a clear shot across the bow, a definite – if you will – middle finger to the transgender community, and every one of The Times’ contributors who signed a letter that might have jeopardized their careers at the paper of record, along with the 100 LGBTQ organizations and leader who sent the separate letter.

READ MORE: ‘Radical Gender Ideology’: Mike Pence Goes to Iowa to Attack Transgender Children in the Name of God (Video)

“The New York Times isn’t defending J.K. Rowling,” The Human Rights Campaign warned on Twitter, suggesting the op-ed had a greater purpose, “they’re emboldening transphobic views and giving people a free pass to discriminate against and harm trans people.”

But it gets worse.

On Thursday, New York Times executive editor Joe Kahn published a statement chastising its contributors, falsely conflating both the contributors’ letter and GLAAD’s letter, and making clear he does not agrees its coverage is biased, and making clear nothing will change.

Semafor’s Max Tani posted Kahn’s letter to Twitter.

“Yesterday, The New York Times received a letter delivered by GLAAD, an advocacy group, criticizing coverage in The Times of transgender issues. It is not unusual for outside groups to critique our coverage or to rally supporters to seek to influence our journalism. In this case, however, members of our staff and contributors to The Times joined the effort. Their protest letter included direct attacks on several of our colleagues, singling them out by name,” Kahn wrote.

Again, there are two separate letters. Times contributors and staffers signed onto a different letter from the GLAAD letter, yet Kahn appears to suggest they are one and the same.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Wesley Lowery went even further, tweeting: “pretty wild that the NYT response is to…lie about the origin of the letter.”

“Participation in such a campaign is against the letter and spirit of our ethics policy,” Kahn says, condemning those who signed the letter. “That policy prohibits our journalists from aligning themselves with advocacy groups and joining protest actions on matters of public policy. We also have a clear policy prohibiting Times journalists from attacking one another’s journalism publicly or signaling their support for such attacks,” he adds.

READ MORE: Legal Experts: Fulton County Grand Jury Report Means ‘Trump Likely Committed Crimes’ and ‘Expect Charges to Follow’

“Our coverage of transgender issues, including the specific pieces singled out for attack, is important, deeply reported, and sensitively written. The journalists who produced those stories nonetheless have endured months of attacks, harassment and threats,” he writes, indicating that he believes they are the real victims, not the transgender people harmed The Times’ biased coverage – coverage cited by right wing lawmakers and officials to defend anti-trans policies and legislation.

Kahn wholly denies any room for growth, any error, any opportunity to do better, claiming, “any review shows that the allegations this group is making are demonstrably false.”

After both stating The Times welcomes “discussion, criticism and robust debate,” and then stating, “Even when we don’t agree, constructive criticism from colleagues who care, delivered respectfully and through the right channels, strengthens our report,” Kahn levels what appears be a threat.

“We do not welcome, and will not tolerate, participation by Times journalists in protests organized by advocacy groups or attacks on colleagues on social media and other public forums.”

The Daily Beast called it “a stern newsroom memo defending the coverage and condemning contributors and staffers who railed against it.”

But The Daily Beast also notes the opinion piece published Thursday, ‘In Defense of J.K. Rowling,’ was written by columnist Pamela Paul, who notably wrote a piece questioning the legitimacy of trans women. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter series, has been [a] leading critic of trans issues.”

 

Image: Osugi / Shutterstock

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

COMMENTARY

Donald Trump Just Called for Another Coup and Hardly Anyone Even Noticed

Published

2 weeks ago

on

March 14, 2023

By

Donald Trump, the one-term ex-president who is running for the Republican nomination for president once again, on Monday advocated for yet another coup against the United States.

Trump is currently under at least four criminal investigations: his unlawful retention and refusal to return classified and other White House documents; his alleged election fraud attempts in Georgia; his alleged hush money payment to two women and the campaign finance issues those raise; and his alleged attempted coup, sometimes referred to as an “autocoup, or “autogolpe” – a self-coup – and the actions he took surrounding the January 6 insurrection.

After Trump’s expected GOP challenger, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, was widely mocked two weeks ago for being unable to tell a reporter from a Murdoch outlet in the UK how he would handle the U.S. efforts to support Ukraine against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s illegal war, Fox’s Tucker Carlson submitted written questions to all current and potential GOP presidential candidates.

DeSantis, in that now-infamous interview, had responded to the Ukraine question by telling the reporter: “Perhaps you should cover some other ground?” and, “I think I’ve said enough.”

READ MORE: Trump Falsely Says Mike Pence Is to ‘Blame’ for Violence on January 6

On Monday, sharing with viewers DeSantis’ new, written response, Carlson declared the Ukraine issue is the most important question of our time: “Until tonight, no one could really say with precision where he stood on the war in Ukraine, which is arguably the most important topic in the world.”

DeSantis’ response made news largely because it is in direct opposition to current U.S. policy. The far-right Florida governor declared the war against Ukraine a mere “territorial dispute” and not in America’s “vital national interests,” as NBC News reported. (Experts disagree with DeSantis’ position, with some calling the war against Ukraine a genocide.)

Trump’s response, however, should have drawn as much attention.

Carlson, in the video below, very specifically says he submitted six questions about Ukraine to Trump, DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Kristi Noem, Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, Greg Abbott, Tim Scott, Chris Christie, Chris Sununu, Asa Hutchinson, John Bolton and Vivek Ramaswamy. (Not all responded.)

According to the segment on his show Monday night, none of those questions included a question about “regime change” in Russia.

And yet Trump’s, DeSantis’ and Pence’s responses did, so it’s possible Carlson wasn’t being fully transparent, although why he didn’t mention he asked that question seems important. And to be clear, the Biden administration has made clear regime change in Russia is not the goal.

So, first, here’s DeSantis’ response that mentions “regime change”:

“A policy of ‘regime change’ in Russia (no doubt popular among the DC foreign policy interventionists) would greatly increase the stakes of the conflict, making the use of nuclear weapons more likely. Such a policy would neither stop the death and destruction of the war, nor produce a pro-American, Madisonian constitutionalist in the Kremlin. History indicates that Putin’s successor, in this hypothetical, would likely be even more ruthless. The costs to achieve such a dubious outcome could become astronomical.”

READ MORE: Chasten Buttigieg Accuses Mike Pence of Using Couple’s Twins as a ‘Punchline’ in Homophobic Attack

And here’s Trump’s response that mentions “regime change”:

“Should the United States support regime change in Russia?”

“No. We should support regime change in the United States, that’s far more important. The Biden administration are the ones who got us into this mess,” Trump wrote, according to Carlson.

“Regime change,” as most know, is the removal of a current government, often by force, which could also be called a coup.

If you google the definition of “regime change,” you’ll find this: “the replacement of one administration or government by another, especially by means of military force.”

Certainly not at the ballot box.

Some might say, as they often do, “Well, maybe Donald Trump doesn’t know what the term really means.”

He does.

May 27, 2019: Asked about his military buildup in the Middle East and his pull-out of President Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear deal, Trump told reporters, “We’re not looking for regime change. I want to make that clear.”

January 3, 2020: “President Donald Trump said Friday that America does not seek ‘regime change’ in Iran, less than a day after the U.S. launched an airstrike that killed the country’s top general, Qasem Soleimani.”

Donald Trump called for another coup Monday night.

Watch Carlson’s segment below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump: ‘World War III Is Looming’ and We Are ‘Doomed’ if You Don’t Put Me Back in the White House

 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Law Gutting Child Labor Protections for Minors Under 16 Years Old

Published

3 weeks ago

on

March 8, 2023

By

Arkansas Republican Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders has signed into law a bill further destabilizing minors in what was once called the “Land of Opportunity.” Her signature comes on the same day lawmakers sent to her desk a sprawling bill revamping Arkansas’ education system to allow wealthy families to remove funds from public elementary and secondary schools and put them into private tuition.

On Tuesday, Huckabee Sanders, barely months into her term, signed HB1410, the Youth Hiring Act, which guts child labor protections and removes what the new governor called “arbitrary” and “burdensome and obsolete” regulations that required the state to verify the age of anyone working who is under 16-years old.

Those regulations merely required “children under the age of 16 obtain an employment certificate, which is accessible to local school officials, before a company can hire them,” Quartz reports. “The change would end one of the only oversight mechanisms for child labor in the state.”

The new law “rolls back significant portions of the state’s child labor protections,” The Washington Post reports.

READ MORE: Fox’s Bartiromo Admitted to Banning Staff From Calling Joe Biden ‘President-Elect’: Report

Before Gov. Huckabee signed the bill into law, children under 16 were required “to verify their age and provide a description of the work schedule, as well as a parent or legal guardian’s consent, in the certificate,” according to Quartz.

While Republican governors and lawmakers across the country have taken up the mantle of “parents’ rights” as they support bans on books, sex education, and any discussion of LGBTQ people, Governor Huckabee has removed the right of parents to be informed of or consent to their young minor children getting a job.

Before Huckabee Sanders signed the Youth Hiring Act, state law prohibited “children under 16 from working more than eight hours a day, more than six days a week and more than 48 hours per week,” KNOE reported. “Opponents of House Bill 1410 have expressed concerns it will open the door to violations of these child labor requirements and put children at risk of human trafficking.”

READ MORE: Anti-LGBTQ Bills Filed in States This Year Rapidly Approaching 400 – Already More Than in All of 2022: ACLU

Quartz also reports that Governor Huckabee, who mentions her own three children in her official state biography, signed the law stripping rights from parents and children just weeks after the U.S. Dept. of Labor fined a slaughterhouse cleaning company $1.5 million for child labor violations, involving over 100 children. That fine includes $150,000 for two locations in Huckabee’s state of Arkansas.

This week Huckabee Sanders flooded her Twitter page with tweets praising her education legislation, including from former Trump Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and other “school choice” activists who call taking public education funds and handing them to private and faith-based institutions education or school “choice.” She posted not one tweet mentioning her stripping parents’ rights and children’s protections from state law.

 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

FBI Director Wray Promotes COVID ‘Lab Leak’ Theory on Fox News, Leading Some Republicans to Talk About ‘Bioweapons’

Published

4 weeks ago

on

March 1, 2023

By

FBI Director Chris Wray promoted the “lab leak” theory of COVID-19’s origins in a Tuesday evening interview on the right-wing propaganda cable TV network Fox News. Wray’s poorly-worded and confusing remarks led some, including several GOP lawmakers, to wrongly propose he may have been suggesting COVID was a bioweapon from China. They also quickly made their way into a congressional hearing less than one hour later when far-right Republican Rep. Jim Banks, citing the FBI Director’s claim, asked if “there is a chance that the Wuhan lab was involved in bioweapons research?”

Director Wray, who was appointed by Donald Trump in 2017, told Fox News’ Bret Baier the “FBI has for quite some time now assessed that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan.”

His “lab leak” claim is not the consensus of the medical or scientific communities, nor the intelligence community, nor the federal government of the United States, nor the World Health Organization.

As NPR noted, “Wray’s remarks are the first in public by a senior law enforcement official following the Energy Department’s classified report, published by the Wall Street Journal on Sunday, saying the pandemic was likely caused by a lab leak in China. That assessment was reportedly ‘low confidence.'”

READ MORE: Buttigieg Goes On Offense as Republicans Attack

In remarks that could further fray the already damaged relationship between Washington and Beijing, Director Wray tossed around the allegation that COVID is the result of “a potential leak from a Chinese government controlled lab that killed millions of Americans and that’s precisely what that capability was designed for.”

His remarks have been seen as confusing.

In context, here’s what Wray said (video is below): “The FBI has folks, agents, professionals, analysts, virologists, microbiologists, etc., who focus specifically on the dangers of biological threats which include things like novel viruses like COVID. And the concerns that in the wrong hands, some bad guys, a hostile nation state, a terrorist, a criminal, the threats that those those could pose. So here you’re talking about a potential leak from a Chinese government-controlled lab that killed millions of Americans and that’s precisely what that capability was designed for.”

(Wray is off on the U.S. death toll, which is estimated to be 1,145,661.)

There’s debate on what Wray meant when he said, “that’s precisely what that capability was designed for.” Some took that to mean China’s Wuhan lab was “designed for” making bioweapons, and some took that to mean the FBI’s “folks” have the capability to investigate those biological threats.

Crooked Media editor-in-chief Brian Beutler, responding to a Twitter user, said: “To state the obvious, this isn’t the most natural construction of the actual words Wray spoke. But if it’s what he *meant* he needs to correct his own error in a high profile setting, because as it stands he just told millions of Fox viewers COVID is probably a Chinese bioweapon.”

Economist and frequent political commentator David Rothschild also pointed to Wray’s confusing remarks, tweeting, “Pretty sure Trump’s man (Wray) *meant* that figuring out how the virus started & spread is what FBI’s capabilities are designed for not that the Chinese intentionally created & leaked the virus to kill millions of Americans: Wray should clarify what he spewed on Republican TV.”

And indeed, it didn’t take long for another far-right Republican, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, to make clear why what Wray said was dangerous and reckless: “Chris Wray made it sound like #Covid was part of a bioweapons program.”

The Director also said, “our work related to this continues and there are not a whole lot of details I can share that aren’t classified. I will just make the observation that the Chinese government seems to me has been doing its best to try to thwart and obfuscate the work here, the work that we’re doing the work that our U.S. government and close foreign partners are doing, and that’s unfortunate for everybody.”

NPR, reporting on Wray’s remarks, noted that “the FBI’s assessment is far from universal. Four other U.S. intelligence agencies as well as the National Intelligence Council say, with low confidence, that COVID emerged through natural transmission.”

READ MORE: ‘Just a Disgrace’: Former DOJ Officials Express Concern, Call for Resignation of FBI Director Wray

“Eight U.S. government agencies are investigating the source of COVID-19, and they remain very divided on the issue. None of them is certain about the cause. Four lean toward natural causes. Two haven’t taken a position,” NPR’s report adds.. “Meanwhile, the evidence produced by the greater scientific community points overwhelmingly to a natural cause, via exposure to an infected animal.”

NBC News reporter Kevin Collier posted the Intelligence Community’s assessment, which was produced prior to Wray’s Tuesday night remarks. He notes the IC assessment “hid which agency thinks what,” and adds: “That the FBI decided to come forth like this, and doing so by heavily touting a major Wray interview on Fox News, is certainly a choice.”

After his interview the FBI posted a portion of his remarks to Twitter.

Others were also quick to respond to Wray’s remarks.

“Wray now claiming lab leak of bioweapon designed to kill Americans,” tweeted the founder and publisher of Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall.

Nicholas Bauer, PhD, tweeted, “Biden should fire Wray. Not because of the underlying content – the FBI hasn’t changed its position – but poor judgment to get interviewed on Fox News and participate in this clearly choreographed media influence blitz.”

Journalist, author, and conspiracy theory expert Mike Rothschild slammed Director Wray: “‘Most likely a potential lab incident’ is pretty big hedge from Wray regarding the lab leak theory. Also, why is the FBI giving an opinion on something that seems like the CIA or CDC’s territory?”

“This is a meaningless statement that sounds designed to do nothing other than get airtime on Fox News,” Rothschild added. “How did they assess this? What is the evidence? What *exact* path did the ‘leak’ take?”

READ MORE: Marjorie Taylor Greene and Mike Lee Spread Anti-Ukraine Disinformation With Deceptively-Edited Viral Video

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.