0 comments
In the last eight months, it’s estimated that The New York Times has published over 13,945 words of front-page coverage debating medical care for trans children.
Big media loves a moral panic, but itโs a little embarrassing to see it from the Times, as was echoed by an open letter from over 1,200 contributors to the paper last month – among them Cynthia Nixon, Chelsea Manning and Roxanne Gay.
The letterโs main point is that uneven and weighted coverage of a topic in this way goes against the editorial standards which the Times is so depended upon to uphold.
The letterโs signatories complained of an โeerily familiar mix of pseudoscience and euphemistic, charged language,โ in the papersโ coverage of trans issues. One article uses the disease-associated term โpatient zeroโ to refer to a young transgender person seeking gender-affirmative care.
Another piece about students changing their gender identity without their parentsโ knowledge fails to mention how the legal strategy it covers is one pursued by anti-trans hate groups.
We are back outside @nytimes this morning highlighting statements from trans community leaders and asking the Times:
Will you meet with trans leaders?
More info at https://t.co/IkQocps8fS pic.twitter.com/c0B4Ym6uIv
— GLAAD (@glaad) March 15, 2023
The letter points back to the parallels between the Timesโ output in the 60s and 70s, which gave homophobic fears disproportionate cover space and featured doctors claiming homosexuality was a disease which could be cured.
The Times also failed to put the AIDs epidemic on the cover until 1983 (when 500+ patients had already died), and was long considered a hostile workplace for queer people.
