New York Times Dismisses Open Letter, Calls Own Contributors Advocates

The response failed to engage with the substance of the criticism of reporting on trans issues at the Times.

by Evan Urquhart

The New York Times didn’t even deign to respond directly to criticism from over 180 of its own contributors today. Instead the paper reported included them, without naming or acknowledging them directly, in a response addressed to the LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD. GLAAD and the Freelance Solidarity Project both published letters today criticizing the Times for bias in their coverage of transgender issues, particularly their coverage of gender affirming care for youth. That coverage has seen increasing criticism from journalists, including Tom Scocca for Popula, and of course our own Evan Urquhart.

The Times’ response was written by Charlie Stadtlander, the Times’ director of external communications. It contrasted the “advocacy” of signers, which again included numerous journalists who have themselves written for the Times, with its own “journalistic mission.”

For the most part, the journalists who signed the open letter are not advocates. Signatories included Ed Yong, a cisgender science journalists, Alison Roman, a cisgender food writer, Osita Nwanevu, a cisgender contributing editor at the New Republic, and many transgender journalists, some of whom write about trans issues, many of whom do not, and only a few of whom should fairly be called advocates.

Ironically, one of the specific critiques of the Times’ reporting has been their tendency to obscure the activist connections of people quoted in their stories on the anti-trans side, while identifying trans people who are quoted as members of advocacy groups. Critics feel this misleads readers, because it obscures the political agenda of those being quoted on the anti-trans side.

If the powers that be at the New York Times hold the biased belief that all trans people are advocates, this could explain why they have struggled so mightily to present fair, unbiased coverage of transgender issues. By being unable to distinguish an advocate from a journalist, particularly if that journalist happens to be trans, the Times is showing their hand. Objective, unbiased reporting really shouldn’t be too much to ask from the paper of record. Apparently, as of today, it still is.