The New York Times’ coverage of transgender people sparks newsroom divide : NPR

A union that represents many of The New York Times‘ journalists sided with writers who signed a petition important of the paper’s coverage of trans people. That sparked a backlash within the newsroom.

MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

An argument has erupted about and inside The New York Times. This time, it entails coverage of trans people, however specifically reviews about medical remedies involving youngsters that shift, which is to say affirm, their gender. There was a protest letter signed by a couple of hundred people, and that included some people who presently work for The New York Times. And that set off waves of arguments contained in the newsroom. We usually flip to NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik to speak about journalism, so we referred to as him to listen to extra about this. David, thanks a lot for becoming a member of us.

DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Pleasure.

MARTIN: So first, the letter. What had been the critics objecting to? And was it primarily in regards to the Times’ coverage of medical care for teens with gender dysphoria or did it transcend that?

FOLKENFLIK: Right. So it is a protest letter that is been signed now by a whole lot of people, a small quantity of whom are actively presently New York Times journalists. They stated that the sweep of the Times’s coverage has proven bias towards trans people, with an actual deal with the query of medical care and therapy for trans youths. And they notably take objection to the concept that the science is not absolutely settled, which comes throughout in a quantity of bigger items that the Times has printed in current months. They argue it’s settled. And that is an unimaginable level of rivalry.

The actual nub of it appears to lie in the concept that there’s been this in depth consideration to the query of medical therapy for teens who’re trans and that it is inducing a form of panic, that it is used to justify new legal guidelines or court docket rulings which are basically proscribing or attempting to bar youths from getting that sort of care. And they’re saying that is deeply dangerous to not solely trans youths, however to trans people who really feel that they’re being, consequently, handled as lower than equal Americans by the Times.

MARTIN: And so how has the Times responded to that?

FOLKENFLIK: Well, it is actually notable, proper? If you assume again to 2020, when the social justice motion welled up, the Times in the end, consequently of pressures inside its personal newsroom, fired their editorial web page editor over an op-ed printed {that a} quantity of not solely, however notably African American journalists objected to. This time, the editor-in-chief, Joe Kahn, and Kathleen Kingsbury, who’s the pinnacle of the opinion part, stated, we have not proven bias. We’ve tried to cowl trans people in all their complexities, all their nuances of their humanity, but additionally look rigorously at medical and moral points which are raised by sure varieties of remedies, whether or not hormone remedies or others, and the way that will have an effect on youths who aren’t absolutely grown but, and that we’d like to take action unflinchingly, and that we now have not proven bias in any respect. They aren’t backing down an inch. And that is the response you’ve got heard.

MARTIN: And this has stored rising, although. I perceive that the union bought concerned, a union that represents most Times journalists, and there have been some backwards and forwards about that. So you’ll be able to simply inform us about that.

FOLKENFLIK: Well, one of the issues that the highest editor stated was this is not the suitable strategy to handle this difficulty. You’ve bought a journalistic difficulty. If you are contained in the Times, come to us. Let’s take care of this as journalists and work via these essential points collectively. The guild stated, look, that is basically in some methods creating an unwelcome surroundings for people who could also be trans themselves or could also be enthusiastic about this, might have people of their households with gender dysphoria. And in order that’s making it an unwelcome workspace. And then you definately had a quantity of veteran Times reporters reply that say this isn’t a task for the union. If we’re enthusiastic about our coverage, that is not a office difficulty. We have to have the ability to discuss these points straight. Lots of give and take inside the newsroom on all sides of this difficulty, some of which hasn’t been expressed as publicly as these letters.

MARTIN: So that is in regards to the Times, and it is apparent that the Times has a really massive, you already know, footprint within the public discourse and in addition could be very influential inside journalism. So if this was only a office difficulty inside the Times, you already know, clearly, it will be of curiosity to some people. But there actually are bigger points at work right here that – I take it. So, David, can we discuss a bit of bit about what these are?

FOLKENFLIK: Yeah. I feel it is, in some methods, in regards to the Times current and a few methods about how the Times shall be appeared again on within the function of journalism, proper? So, you already know, in case you assume again to how the Times lined homosexual rights and homosexual people, it was for many years dismissive, condescending, patronizing or antagonistic, hostile in a means that the Times in the end needed to grapple with a couple of many years in the past and are available to phrases with and alter the best way they approached this. And a quantity of Times journalists stated to me they do not need to must look again on the best way the Times has approached this now and assume of this as a spot that has cultivated a panic or contributed to a society that treats trans people as lower than or much less consequential than others. And but the Times nonetheless desires to have the ability to say it is distilling these points via a journalistic prism and never a political one. They do not need to take such care as a political stance or as a result of of strain. They need to achieve this as a result of it is the suitable factor to do journalistically. Navigating that, I feel, goes to be a really effective line for the Times as they see these voices inside and outdoors the newsroom raised in critique.

MARTIN: But can I simply ask you about this entire query of what constitutes hurt and what function ought to that query of hurt play in figuring out what and how you can cowl sure issues? And, I imply, this is not simply a problem for the Times.

FOLKENFLIK: The query of hurt is a vital one. You’re listening to people who signed that letter, notably people who’re themselves trans people, say I’m being negated right here as a result of the overwhelming course of coverage is elevating questions on this sort of medical care with out having an equal or higher quantity of consideration being given to, what are the repercussions if these youths aren’t given sure varieties of medical care? By the identical token, I feel there are a selection of senior executives on the Times who’re signaling they do not need to be intimidated from trying rigorously at points which aren’t but settled, which do have implications even when the numbers are comparatively small.

MARTIN: That’s NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik. David, thanks a lot for becoming a member of us once more.

FOLKENFLIK: You guess.

Copyright © 2023 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our web site phrases of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for additional information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This textual content will not be in its last kind and could also be up to date or revised sooner or later. Accuracy and availability might fluctuate. The authoritative report of NPR’s programming is the audio report.