Media watchdog Howard Kurtz denounced USA Today for permitting Stacey Abrams to alter an opinion piece without annotation, sparking questions about the publication's fairness and editorial standards.
In a glaring display of biased censorship, Louisiana Senator John Kennedy's op-ed criticizing transgender athletes competing in women's sports was quietly removed from several newspapers owned by Gannett, the parent company of USA Today, without his knowledge.
According to communications reviewed by Fox News Digital, Kennedy was informed that his opinion piece contained "inflammatory" language that violated the company's ethical guidelines. Gannett's Opinion Editor and Vice President of Standards and Ethics, Michael McCarter, defended the decision, stating that Kennedy's column did not meet their criteria of treating people with respect.
"We recognize the importance of sharing varying perspectives and the vital role we play convening conversations," McCarter said. "However, Sen. Kennedy's submitted opinion column did not meet our ethical guidelines, which state we will treat people with respect. After further review, our editorial team removed the column from our website. Sen. Kennedy has been given the opportunity to revise his language - not his viewpoint - to adhere with our standards."
Despite this alleged infraction, the op-ed published by USA Today contained no inflammatory language and adhered to journalistic standards. Kennedy's analogies and examples were clear and well-reasoned, highlighting the unfair advantages that biological men possess over women in athletic competitions.
Kennedy expressed his dismay over the censorship, stating, "USA TODAY Network apparently does not like the way I express myself. They think they are the speech police. Drunk on certainty and virtue, they think they are our moral teacher. This attitude is why so many Americans have lost confidence in the media. The media is not going to win that trust back until they return to neutrality instead of advocacy."
Fox News Digital's inquiries prompted Gannett to add a disclaimer to the broken links, indicating that the content had been removed for not meeting their editorial standards.
The decision to remove Kennedy's op-ed stands in stark contrast to USA Today's handling of an op-ed published in 2021 by Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams. Abrams was allowed to retroactively edit her opinion piece to downplay her support for boycotts against her state without an accompanying editor's note.
This disparity in treatment raises serious concerns about potential partisan bias within the Gannett-owned media outlets. The silencing of conservative voices and the preferential treatment of liberal viewpoints undermine the credibility and integrity of these publications.
Kennedy's op-ed, which sparked the controversy, presented a well-reasoned argument against transgender athletes competing in women's sports. The piece highlighted the physical advantages of biological men and the potential negative consequences for female competitors.
"Many fair-minded people reject the idea that women and girls who work hard to develop their athletic talents must sacrifice their opportunities, privacy and safety to promote gender activism. I’m one of them," Kennedy stated in the op-ed.
The removal of Kennedy's op-ed and the questionable editorial decisions surrounding it suggest a troubling trend within the Gannett-owned media landscape. The erosion of journalistic principles and the abandonment of fair and impartial reporting threaten to further erode public trust in the media.
