(Nathan Howard/Pool Photo via AP)
The New York Times is being coy about calling out bigotry again.
This time, it’s with their the delicately-phrased headline about JD Vance’s recent insinuations regarding James Talarico’s sexuality: “Vance’s Talarico Attacks Show His Penchant for Personal Broadsides,” followed by an equally sterile deck: “At a rally in Texas, the vice president suggested the Democratic Senate nominee is gay, a comment criticized as homophobic.”
Here’s a handy tell that editors and writers publication know that a remark is homophobic (or racist or sexist) but can’t summon the courage name it as such: Unnamed “critics” coalesce out of thin air to voice concern, or an omniscient passive voice passes judgment–all so the paper can produce a conflict for the bigot to address from a distance: “What do you say to critics who say [you did an explicitly awful thing]?” suggests the offense is debatable, a matter of opinion. Maybe it wasn’t so bad? Who can say?
Notably, the Times did not use the same weak-sauce dodge when they were under attack. The headline of a story about the administration’s press ban? “How Trump Is Wielding Power to Stifle Speech,” with no invisible critics to soften the blow.
The writer’s angle is that Vance’s remarks are anomalous for the vice president, rather than a part of the GOP’s long-running and desperate struggle to impugn Talarico’s masculinity. “Even in that environment, Mr. Vance’s attacks on Mr. Talarico have been strikingly juvenile, critics said.” Critics say! But were they really so remarkable? Trump calling Paxton’s opponent “TalaFREAKo” would not get him a seat at the Algonquin Round Table.
Further, dancing around how Vance’s jibes are part of larger Republican movement to demonize gay people suggests their homophobia is a tacit ploy or somehow unusual, that the party is trying to avoid the reputation for being hateful. To the contrary! MAGA’s attacks on queer people are an explicit part of their platform.
Euphemisms just make the Times look like they’re not paying attention. They’re covering rage-bait “trans the kids” ads, Trump’s comments, and moral panics about drag story hour–all part of the same hateful pattern, like Vance’s slurs–as mere campaign rhetoric. They’re pretending to not know what those ads do.
——
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.
New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!
Comments
↓ Scroll down for comments ↓