Mara Gay argues that holding Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Trump equally accountable "sounds a little silly" given the vast differences in their conduct and commitment to democratic norms.
Mara Gay, an editorial board member for The New York Times, sparked controversy on Thursday when she suggested that it is "a little silly" for journalists to hold Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump to the same standards.
Gay made her comments during an appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," where she argued that the "choice is obvious" between the two and that a different standard should be applied to Trump.
NYT Editorial Board Member Defends Asymmetrical Accountability for Harris and Trump
"I think the challenge, not just for journalists, but really for the country, is that not only is Donald Trump a threat, but, you know, it lowers the bar," Gay said. "So I don’t think it’s unacceptable. And I think it’s important for our role as journalists to really push every candidate for office."
Gay went on to say that while there are things she would like to see more of from Harris, such as policy speeches and taking more questions from the press, it is important to consider the broader context of the extremism within the Republican Party and Trump's own behavior.
NYT Editorial Board Member Defends Asymmetrical Accountability for Harris and Trump
"It’s just the context is difficult because of the extremism of the Republican Party, because of how extreme Donald Trump is, it’s hard to hold both candidates accountable equally, because one is committed to democracy and is functioning as a normal candidate from a normal American party, and the other is not," Gay said.
Gay's comments were met with mixed reactions, with some agreeing that the unprecedented threat posed by Trump necessitates a different approach to accountability. However, others argued that it is incumbent upon journalists to hold all candidates to the same standards regardless of their party affiliation.
NYT Editorial Board Member Defends Asymmetrical Accountability for Harris and Trump
The New York Times editorial board has come under fire in recent months for its decision to no longer endorse candidates in local and state races. Some critics have accused the board of abdicating its responsibility to provide guidance to voters, while others have defended the decision as a necessary step to avoid the appearance of bias.
In a statement announcing the decision, Times opinion editor Kathleen Kingsbury said that while elections remain critical to the lives of its audience, the editorial board will cease the endorsement process for New York elections. She emphasized that the Times will continue to report aggressively on election races and provide perspective on the candidates and issues at stake.
NYT Editorial Board Member Defends Asymmetrical Accountability for Harris and Trump
The Times' decision to discontinue endorsements has reignited the debate over the role of editorial boards in the media landscape. Some argue that editorial boards play an important role in informing public opinion and holding candidates accountable, while others believe that their opinions often reflect the biases of their publishers and can be harmful to the objectivity of journalism.
