New York, New York - After receiving an open letter from hundreds of contributors listing concerns over biased coverage of the trans community, The New York Times sparked further furor with an op-ed defending Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling.

On Wednesday, a collective of Times contributors penned an open letter to Philip B. Corbett, the associate managing editor for standards, out of concern for "editorial bias in the newspaper's reporting on transgender, non⁠-⁠binary, and gender-nonconforming people."

The letter referenced several Times features that included transphobic rhetoric, such as one piece that used the term "patient zero" for a trans child seeking gender-affirming medical care.

"Some of us are trans, non⁠-⁠binary, or gender-nonconforming, and we resent the fact that our work, but not our person, is good enough for the paper of record," the letter said.

Daily Horoscope Today's horoscope: Free daily horoscope for Friday, November 22, 2024

The next day, the Times published an op-ed by Pamela Paul titled "In Defense of J.K. Rowling." The Harry Potter author has faced widespread criticism for her views on the trans community that have been called transphobic by many LGBTQ+ advocates.

Paul argues that Rowling has not said anything definitionally transphobic and cites quotes from the author in which she supports the trans community. The writer goes on to defend Rowling's advocacy for spaces open solely to cisgender women, like sex-segregated prisons or shelters.

Many argue that her stance is, in fact, transphobic, and her continued association with activists displaying blatant transphobia has continued to garner criticism.

The defense of the author was further blasted for its timing, as trans rights are being repeatedly stripped in the US and just days after a trans teenager, Brianna Ghey, was murdered in the UK.

In addition to the letter from Times contributors, another letter from advocacy groups and organizations was also sent to the outlet, citing the same concerns about anti-trans bias in its coverage.

The Times focused on the letter from advocacy groups rather than the one from its contributors in its response.

The newspaper defended its coverage, saying that the mission of advocacy groups like GLAAD are different from "The Times' journalistic mission."

Ukraine conflict Zelensky urges "strong" response to Russian hypersonic missile strike

The reply further emphasizes that the coverage referenced "reported deeply and empathetically on issues of care and well-being for trans teens and adults ... We're proud of it."

On Thursday, the contributors responded back to The Times, writing, "We are disappointed that the New York Times chose to use their public response to Wednesday's coalition letter from GLAAD and other organizations as an opportunity to dismiss the well-documented complaint of editorial bias detailed in our letter."

They argue further that the letters differ significantly and that the contributors' letter draws "on the Times' own history and editorial standards."

Many argue that the op-ed on Rowling's publication the day after the letters is just one more clear illustration of their lack of concern over biased reporting.

A memo written to the Times staff expanded on the outlet's response and warned journalists against participating in advocacy campaigns.

"It is not unusual for outside groups to critique our coverage or to rally supporters to seek to influence our journalism," executive editor Joe Kahn said. "In this case, however, members of our staff and contributors to The Times joined the effort. Their protest letter included direct attacks on several of our colleagues, singling them out by name."

Kahn continued on to underscore that Times journalists are not allowed to participate "in protests organized by advocacy groups or attacks on colleagues on social media and other public forums."

The outrage has only continued to escalate as LGBTQ+ advocates continue to speak out against the Times' reporting and handling of the open letters.

"Trans people are under attack and are being killed simply for existing. The New York Times should be ashamed for publishing this piece," one user tweeted after the defense of J.K. Rowling was published.

Rowling is looking to set the record straight on her beliefs, saying in a new podcast that her comments have been "profoundly misunderstood."