L.A. Times: Throw Out Prop. 8

Time to boycott the LA Times again. They did not get the message the first time.

Raphael: You are correct in the strict news reporting sense, but the LA Times regulaarly assigns staff writer/reporters to write what the paper calls "column one" and similar feature stories, where the reporter and the reporter's personality are a part of the story, ie, stories relating to speed dating, getting married etc. (I have a big file on these going back twenty years). Yet for some reason GLBTs never get assigned to these, or, if they do (and I know who some of these very good reporters are), their GLBT aspect alswys remains hidden/closeted, no matter how relevant to the story, and in stark contrast to similar stories written by non-GLBTs. The only exception to this was sports writer Mike Penner, which I deal with in more detail in response to casey in Vt below and, as we know, that one did not end up happily to say the least.

Caesey in Vt: The Penner situation was somewhat different in the beginning than what GLB LA Times staffers encounter but also similar as it turned out. Since Penner's gender change was physical and public by nature, there was no place for the Times mgt. to hide to avoid a lawsuit and maintain the "appearance" (vs. the reality) of support for GLBTs at the paper. Management at the LA Times was terrified ("Terrified Liberal Syndrome" or "TLS") about negative reader reaction to Penner's gender change and competely misjudged it. As reported in a recent story in GQ Magazine, in the end Penner did not feel the Times was sufficiently supportive and the end of the story was not a happy one as we all know. GLBT staffers at the LA Times have always seen coming out in the paper as career suicide. I haven't seen anything yet that Penner's literal suicide has had any positive effect on this long established belief.

Thomas Coleman, I think you have the wrong end of the stick. When reporting a story a good reporter will not inject their biases on what is reported, the editors of the Times seem to be encouraging that kind of reporting, I am sure it applies to reporters doing stories on the gay community, racial stories, religous stories or even military stories. That does not mean they are pushing their reporters into the closet, it just means follow the principals of reporting; who, what, why, when and where. With competition from TV, the Internet and other instant media, perhaps the LA Times feels their survival is to deliver the facts without being colored by the reporters opinions or feelings on the subject, or conjecture which is all you get from CNN now. Too much news today is not reported based on the facts but on sensationalist you can make the story. News is one thing and Opinion pieces are something else, maybe they are tired of the on again, off again for gay marriage in Cal.

@ OB from CAZ: BRAVO! Nicely worded.

"traditional Moral belief" ...what a nice tidy phrase for what should have been called a "religious taboo" or "primitive superstition"...

Thomas Coleman, what are you talking about? The Times closets its writers? This is the newspaper that gave sportswriter Mike Penner every resource they had, so that he could describe for people the transgender process when he became Christine Daniels. And I remember being a teenager in Southern California in the 80s, and my teachers would point out all the gay-supportive stories and op-ed pieces. That paper was a psychological lifeboat in one of the country's most conservative areas. Union organizers have a case against the paper, but for the LGBT community, The Times has fought the good fight for a long . To paraphrase the country song, they were allies when allies wasn't cool.

"I wouldn't be to quick to congratulate the LA times. It is a daily. It panders to the majority of readers." Then arguably this would be a GOOD thing - if it's pandering to a majority and it assumes that's what the majority wants. Right?

As former LA Times Editorial Page writer Lee Dembart pointed out twenty years ago, the paper has usually supported us editorially but fails and refuses to allow any of its gay or lesbian staff writers, staff columnists or editors to refer to or infer themselves that way in the paper as it routinely and actively encourages its non-gay staffers. Twenty years later, the de facto Don't Ask Don't Tell policy at the Times remains firmly in effect. Favorable editorials are fine and necessary but as we have seen clearly not sufficient to overcome Prop. 8 and its consequences. Like the hopelessly muddled "message" from our current Prez, the Times says it's "for" and then acts "against" us. No wonder the road to our equality is so long, winding and hard.

That was great that the L.A. Times did that. Every bit helps. Plus, the Los Angeles base that voted was split down the middle on the Proposition 8 votes with more leaning towards voting yes.