Talk:Megan Twohey

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography C‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Journalism C‑class

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States C‑class

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women writers C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

sources

i saw the tag about primary sources added in january 2018 by Emir of Wikipedia but a glance through the article seems to show a strong mix of secondary sources with a few primary sources on which megan twohey was a co-author. at the date of my posting this, there are 26 sources used, but only a handful (i think six?) feature her name as an author. while i understand that this is not ideal, i don't think it warrants a tag that states the article relies too much on this material. can anyone offer another opinion? i'm planning on cleaning through the sources and removing this tag shortly unless anyone chimes in. thanks. CanoeUnlined (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide forum

The sources currently used in the section are all the original report, which is a primary source. Later discussions of original reporting can be secondary like this source [1] that's used, but right now, it's only being used to support the number fifty. There is not a lack of secondary sourcing on the topic, which includes:

From the Center for Countering Digital Hate, The Incelosphere: Exposing pathways into incel communities and the harms they pose to women and children
From the Poynter Institute, How The New York Times handled life-or-death ethical issues while reporting on a popular suicide website - Probably the most important secondary source on her reporting as the article is directly about her journalism, rather than the content of the report which plays a secondary role
From WBUR, Disturbing website encourages vulnerable users to die by suicide. What's being done about it?
From The Daily, 'Kids Are Dying. How Are These Sites Still Allowed?'

There's also others in the main article Sanctioned Suicide. I think discussing the journalistic/behind the scenes side is much more important than the report itself for an article of a journalist. :3 F4U (they/it) 07:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

source for risk of Weinstein exposé hurting advertising money.

I have not found any suggestion in the source cited that anyone was concerned about a risk to advertising at the New York Times. I am contemplating removing just these words "and the exposé risked hurting advertising money" if no one has any different thoughts.

The footnote on that sentence is:

( Symonds, Alexandria (October 15, 2017). "How to Break a Sexual Harassment Story"

Morris (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

= Transgender healthcare

170.149.100.10 (talk) Hi (talk) My name is Danielle Rhoades Ha and I work for The New York Times Company. I'm writing to propose the following additions to Transgender healthcare section. 170.149.100.10 (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times has defended its coverage as nuanced and fair. (Citation: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/feb/17/new-york-times-contributors-open-letter-protest-anti-trans-coverage)

And the Washington Post published an analysis on The Times’s coverage of transgender medical care that refuted the criticism stating, “The work of the Times on trans issues over the past few years has been varied, rigorous, newsworthy and factual in a way that informs the paper’s readers.” (Citation: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/15/new-york-times-transgender-coverage-controversy/)

The Washington Post article noted that after reading the statement from the United States World Professional Association for Transgender Health – “which failed to puncture the piece” — Twohey requested a discussion with Madeline Deutsch, a physician who is president of USPATH, to vet the document’s claims against the Times story. “A Times spokesperson said Twohey sought to address ‘inaccuracies and mischaracterizations’ that she’d identified in the WPATH/USPATH letter. But Dr. Deutsch largely refused to engage with the specific content of their letter or the article. Dr. Deutsch also said that she did not want news coverage that examined questions within the field of medical treatment of transgender youth because it would be used by those seeking to ban the treatment.

The Washington Post noted that “In article after article, Times journalists expose bigoted efforts to deny rights to trans people, tell the stories of memorable trans lives and treat the people at the center of contemporary controversies with humanity.”

“Debates among medical providers over how to treat trans youths, therefore, have wider implications with each passing day. The Times is doing what any good news organization would do: Cover them.”