Trackbacks & Pings

1. Why is The New York Times censoring discussions on adoption? at Anti-Racist Parent - for parents committed to raising children with an anti-racist outlook on 13 Nov 2007 at 2:27 pm

   [...] out my post about this on Racialicious. Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover [...]

2. Shut Up, Tama Janowitz. Just shut up. And turn in your parenting license while you’re at it. « ReadingWritingLiving on 13 Nov 2007 at 8:37 pm

   [...] at Racialicious has a really articulate commentary on the whole [...]

3. To Willow Janowitz: You’re not alone…. « Outside In . . . And Back Again on 14 Nov 2007 at 12:08 am

   [...] Rollins, Ji In at Twice the Rice, Jae Ran at Harlow’s Monkey, Susan at ReadingWritingLiving, Carmen at Racialicious, Resist Racism, and Sun Yung Shin.  And it is also the section that had me shouting, “What [...]

4. Where are the Outraged Parents here? « My Sky ~ Multiracial Family Life on 14 Nov 2007 at 2:03 pm

   [...] The New York Times Censors Adult Adoptees on Adoption Blog, from Racialicious [...]

5. American Family » Late to the Party on 15 Nov 2007 at 10:57 am

   [...] with only limited bathroom breaks.”  YUCK.  But there are many smarter, more articulate bloggers out there who address those [...]

6. NYT Adoption Blog Salts Wounds In International Adoption Community | Popehat on 16 Nov 2007 at 12:42 am

   [...] who think the other people take it too seriously. Racialicious, a blog about race and pop culture, picked up on it and linked to many adoption blogs and blogs of adoptive parents. Racialicious’ critique is that the NYT blog excludes some viewpoints they view as [...]

7. Adoptees Are Not Your Therapists | Popehat on 17 Nov 2007 at 11:52 am

   [...] familiar with my writing might expect. We’ll see if it gets published. Hopefully places like Racialicious and Heart, Mind, and Seoul will continue to monitor the question of whether the NYT is excluding [...]

8. Is It Possible… « Land of the Not-So-Calm on 22 Nov 2007 at 1:08 am

   [...] But I am angry that there are some really benighted and ignorant people out there as well. (Yep, still ticked about this! Not to mention this.) [...]

9. Who Is Choosing Whom? « Land of the Not-So-Calm on 23 Nov 2007 at 2:39 pm

   [...] or first parents. (This bias toward adoptive parent viewpoints was nowhere more evident than in the frustrating and unethical censorship of adult adoptee voices responding to that awful essay by Tama [...]

10. My Comment on Katy Robinson’s “Helping the Next Generation” « Land of the Not-So-Calm on 25 Nov 2007 at 10:08 pm

    [...] what happened the last time I tried to do this I’m not sure if my comment will be posted or not, but either way you can [...]

11. Sundays with Stretchy Pants » New York Times=Very Uncool on 29 Feb 2008 at 12:20 pm

    [...] Don’t censor people who know what they’re talking about.  That’s just wrong.  Censoring people who don’t know what they’re talking about?  I’m totally cool with that.  I know, I know, slippery slopes and such.  How about we just start with the assholes like Tama Janowitz and all of her supportive commentors who think it’s cool to tell a 12-year-old daughter who was adopted from China, “Well, you know, if you were still in China you would be working in a factory for 14 hours a day with only limited bathroom breaks!”  See, that’s just mean. I’m not a transnational adoptee or anything, but I can still see that that’s all kinds of mean.  And people who leave comments that say that that is totally mean should not be censored by the New York Times.  I mean, it’s THE New York Times.  WTF? [...]

Comments

1. jae ran wrote:

   Carmen, it’s now up to 7 adult adoptees and 2 adoptive parent allies who have tried to respond but have been censored.

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 2:27 pm ¶

2. Janette wrote:

   “No ancient Chinese secret for you”……Huh???

   What does this have to do with Jeff’s article?

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 2:33 pm ¶

3. Latoya Peterson wrote:

   Jae Ran -

   Thanks so much for bringing this up. I had gone over to read the stories (also a fan of the Ethnically Incorrect Daughter blog) and was struck by how one sided the comments were elsewhere. Sumeia’s story had a lot of good reactions from people who were offering help or aid. The rest of the series…well…the other three entries I saw did not move me.

   I also did not realize how people disregard issues that TRAs face in adulthood. Even with a piece as nuanced and reflective as Sumeia’s, you still get comments like this:

   A young friend with anger over her international adoption has spent years rejecting the only family that has been in her life for 30 years. Only the patience of her family has kept them from being totally alienated by her rage. I hope your anger does not come at the expense of the love and family that is yours by right. The choice is yours.

   — Posted by Janet

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 2:49 pm ¶

4. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

   Oy. We’ll see if my comment comes thru moderation.

   Here’s what’s in the comment box: “Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.”

   As someone who does this sort of thing for a living (community/comment/content moderation for a newspaper.com), I know that the attitude of different papers toward comments vary greatly, from “let’s allow a free-for-all” to “no comments for you great unwashed at all,” and the NYT, with its hoity-toity establishment culture and history, is still grappling with what it means to let other voices thru the gate; witness this recent Public Editor column: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/opinion/04pubed.html

   For what it’s worth, I’ve forwarded the link to this post to a couple mediaworld bloggers.

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 2:50 pm ¶

5. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

   P.S. Um, do they even realize who they have in their “adoptee blogroll”?

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 3:04 pm ¶

6. jae ran wrote:

   DIASL, I know, how ironic. Only, it’s because Sumeia put those up.

   I’m glad you brought this to some other media bloggers. I’m struggling with how to get the NYT readers to know that we’re being censored.

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 3:49 pm ¶

7. Latoya Peterson wrote:

   Has anyone contacted Mediabistro?

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 3:54 pm ¶

8. dnA wrote:

   “no ancient chinese secret for you!”
   

   ROFLMAO

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:01 pm ¶

9. dnA wrote:

   hmm I guess I have to work on my html tags.

   But not as much as the Times needs to work on its blogs.

   Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:03 pm ¶

10. FranSky wrote:

    I’ve heard some parents say to their biological kids when they’ve been really misbehaving “you’re lucky I didn’t give you up for adoption” or “you should be grateful you have me as you parent & not some _____ fill in the blank.” So I think many a parent guilts their kids in a similar way to Janowitz. The difference however with what Janowitz said (not that I condone talking to kids like that in any context) is that Janowitz has that funky smell of entitlement in her rant.

    That she’s speaking to her adult daughter who has done something meaningful, which is to acknowledge her experiences & make room for others to acknowledge theirs, then not only dismiss it but appears to think her experience of parenting her daughter is more important than her daughters experience of being parented.

    What passes for insight to Janowitz is defintely lacking. Peace!
    ~F

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:13 pm ¶

11. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

    Latoya and Jae Ran, I’ve sent this link to Romenesko, Amy Gahran, Will Sullivan, Jeff Jarvis, and JD Lasica, so far. An email to FishbowlNY wouldn’t hurt, you wanna do it, Latoya?

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:28 pm ¶

12. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

    Awesome Jason – thanks! I already took care of FishbowlNY and CJR too.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:33 pm ¶

13. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

    Btw, interesting that they haven’t posted a single new comment since 1:56 pm Eastern.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:34 pm ¶

14. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    DIASL – Thanks for that. Carmen beat me to Fishbowl NY.

    I don’t read the NY Times on a regular basis, and I am not familiar with their layout – but do they have an Ombudsman like the post? Could we get Jae Ran & Co. heard in the Op-Ed section?

    (Thinking of the WaPo here and how dissenting opinions about what has been written are aired.)

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:35 pm ¶

15. jae ran wrote:

    I’m working on a response, along with several others, for either the OpEd or Letter to the Editor.

    I keep wondering what people think when they click to my blog from the link on the NYT blog and they read about all of us being censored.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 4:55 pm ¶

16. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

    Already dashed off an email to the Public Editor. (That’s who wrote that column I linked to above.)

    Also, here’s their contact page: http://nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/infoservdirectory.html

    Hard to tell who this should go to–nobody in charge of all blogs, it seems. Could to to digital media, but that’s just some forms and a VP’s email. Could go the op/ed route, since the blog is listed as an opinions blog.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 5:16 pm ¶

17. Ji In wrote:

    I’m one of the adult adoptees who has been censored and turned away. It shouldn’t come as any great surprise that several of the NYT editors & staff writers who have been at the helm of their adoption articles are, in fact, adoptive parents. Does anyone have any journalistic objectivity they can spare? Seems the NYT has misplaced theirs.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 6:22 pm ¶

18. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

    Okay, something weird is happening–are comments that were submitted earlier but withheld being added in? Cuz I swear that last comment by Frank on the NYT post keeps getting a higher and higher number. So maybe they’re adding in stuff now that folks are complaining? Dunno. But if they ever add mine in, the numbered comments I refer to are totally wrong now!

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 6:30 pm ¶

19. Safiya wrote:

    “No ancient Chinese secret for you!”

    Quote of the week. For sure.

    Guilting your kids in anyway is crap. Adopted or biological – you chose to bring them into your life so shut the hell up. I mean technically, if your kids are complaining you can kill them and make them into food – so what? Should they be grateful you don’t eat them or something?

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 6:57 pm ¶

20. Jae Ran wrote:

    Thanks for the link, DIASL!

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 7:33 pm ¶

21. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

    DIASL – yes they are totally doing that. That guy Frank’s comment (”Huh? My parents are Chinese immigrants “) was no. 71 for all afternoon. Now all of a sudden he is no. 99.

    Something fishy is going on.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 7:35 pm ¶

22. Mireille wrote:

    Parental guilt is just harmful, no matter the circumstances. Take my adoptive father, for example. He always on me for waisting his money on a useless major. But I could never imagine him saying “You should be thankful I married your mother and you’re in America now so you don’t have to be a filipino bar girl” even as a joke.

    Posted 13 Nov 2007 at 9:15 pm ¶

23. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

    So, I just looked, and at 128 comments, comments are now closed!

    I’m sorry, but as someone who works in this area for a living and knows all sides of the debates over user commenting on newspaper.coms, this is just screwed up–if you moderate comments, fine, but you moderate them in order, you don’t filter things back in later, especially on a site that numbers comments! And then to shut down commenting without any explanation, without any notation anywhere… Not the way to do it, NYT, not at all.

    BTW, a new post is up by Hollee McGinnis, dated 11/13/07 , 8:01 p.m. At first glance, pretty good, and begging for like-minded comments.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 12:05 am ¶

24. sarahkim wrote:

    Thanks for posting this, Carmen. This blog series at the NYT has really touched a nerve with a lot of us in the community, and I’m glad to have such great allies like you helping spread the word. Hope we get through to some people out there….

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 12:38 am ¶

25. daddyinastrangeland wrote:

    FYI, Will Sullivan’s Journerdism.com has picked up the link to this post.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 1:04 am ¶

26. egypt4 wrote:

    I’m ducking here to avoid the tomatoes being tossed around… but I’d be interested to hear folks’ reactions to Jane Aronson’s piece.

    Also, this question might be answered somewhere else, but how do you know Jae Ran was considered too edgy? They told her this? Jae Ran, if you’re reading, can you answer? (I’m not suggesting this isn’t the case, just wondering.)

    Oh, and for the record, I squirmed reading a few pieces as well. Ugh.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 7:08 am ¶

27. jae ran wrote:

    Hi egypt4,
    email me off line!

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 11:56 am ¶

28. Addie Pray wrote:

    Of all the people, blogs and publications that have oppressed adult adoptees, I’m still sad and amazed that The NYT is one of them. Especially commenting on a piece written by this woman.

    The world is really a strange place.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 11:57 am ¶

29. Susan wrote:

    egypt4,
    I appreciated Jane Aronson’s honesty about the “blind date” nature of meeting her son, although I was surprised that this would surprise her after all the work she has done in international adoption. It made her seem a bit naive, which was also surprising. Her comment about her son’s “nappy hair” made me cringe. I would have liked a bit of epilogue to know how their relationship developed after that Blind Date. The comments about what a “savior” Aronson is also made me really uncomfortable. But overall I appreciated her honesty in the experience.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 2:07 pm ¶

30. Natasha wrote:

    Why are the only people up in arms about this adult adoptees? Where are all the angry and offended adoptive parents? Tana’s not really AP mainstream, is she?

    http://multiracialsky.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/where-are-the-outraged-parents-here/

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 2:21 pm ¶

31. Melissa wrote:

    I read the Janowitz article yesterday and was horrified but not surprised. I had read another equally insensitive article she wrote years ago when she first adopted Willow. At the time I thought about how her daughter would feel when she was old enough to read it. It is sad to see that Janowitz has not grown in her time as a parent, what she is doing to her daughter is abuse. Even more horrifying to me was the response to her article, particularly by adoptive parents. As an adoptive parent I used to feel defensive when I heard AP’s critisized. I believed that AP’s had come a long way from the AP’s of the past. That we had learned from their mistakes. But the more time I spend online, the more idiots I see out there, willfully ignorant and damaging to their children. We are not all like that.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 2:55 pm ¶

32. Yar0 wrote:

    shame on all of you for extinguishing the warm fuzzies recieved from Janowitz’s heartfelt opinion piece. unkind. so unkind.

    by the way. naming children “willow” after an 80’s film about afflicted little people is also known for causing future rensentment in adopted children. just sayin… *smirk*

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 3:33 pm ¶

33. gatamala wrote:

    I’m one of the adult adoptees who has been censored and turned away. It shouldn’t come as any great surprise that several of the NYT editors & staff writers who have been at the helm of their adoption articles are, in fact, adoptive parents. Does anyone have any journalistic objectivity they can spare? Seems the NYT has misplaced theirs.

    Ji in~ I have read the Times’ smug sounding pieces on adoption (”In the Upper West Side, the Chinese Nanny to Teach your Child Mandarin is the latest peripheral accessory to your adopted child” – or something like that).

    I always thought that there were biased and had an agenda – their own – to push. I don’t recall reading the adoptees words. I knew I wasn’t crazy.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 4:50 pm ¶

34. Winn wrote:

    This is intriguing. Here is a link to a podcast of our local public radio station’s talk show, featuring an interview with Elizabeth Larson, an AP of a TRA from Guatemala. She has an upcoming article in Mother Jones magazine about many of the issues brought up in this NYT debacle. The interview is well-done and thought-provoking, and the call-in comments are interesting, to say the least. You can download the podcast at the following link, and the interview is called “Did I Steal My Daughter?” I hope the tag works!

    http://www.npr.org/rss/podcast/podcast_detail.php?siteId=5183228

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 10:35 pm ¶

35. leonard kim wrote:

    NYT is liberal garbage. They have an agenda and always covers a story with a bias. They love to blame china for everything. And they love to exalt asian women who sell out to white men while at the same time, ignore dehumanize and isolate asian men from the rest of society. Liberal degenerate white media. Is it no wonder, my asian brothers and I hate you vile degenerates more and more as the days go by.

    Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 11:43 pm ¶

36. Margie wrote:

    What the NYT did is absolutely appalling.

    http://thirdmom.blogspot.com/2007/11/appalling.html

    Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 10:22 am ¶

37. Jennifer wrote:

    I know I’m jumping into this late (Thursday, 11/15) but I just tried to post a comment on Gammage’s “Lion Dance” blog raising the issue of race–the fact that it’s not just a Transnational adoption issue but a transracial adoption and mixed-race family issue. I posted at 2pm and haven’t seen it come up and they have posted someone else’s comment at 2:54pm so I don’t think it’s just a time lag issue either (because I’ve posted comments to NYTimes before and it never took this long). DAMN CENSORSHIP!!

    Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 4:44 pm ¶

38. Susan wrote:

    Please add this great post to the chorus of outrage.

    http://ungratefullittlebastard.blogspot.com/2007/11/tama-janowitz-let-me-introduce-you-to.html

    Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 6:30 pm ¶

39. Susan wrote:

    And I think this could use a response.

    http://www.newpopehat.dreamhosters.com/2007/11/15/nyt-adoption-blog-salts-wounds-in-international-adoption-community/

    Posted 16 Nov 2007 at 2:20 pm ¶

40. cloudscome wrote:

    I put up my 2 cents. http://sandycovetrail.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/dear-tama/

    Posted 17 Nov 2007 at 7:16 am ¶

41. Ken wrote:

    There’s a new essay up today by a 16-year-old adoptee. It’s really very positive by any reasonable standard, but naturally one of the first comments they post (purportedly by an adult adotpee) is of the “why can’t you stop whining about racism” variety. I posted a polite response — vastly more polite than the person deserved — and we’ll see if it gets approved.

    Posted 17 Nov 2007 at 11:20 am ¶

42. Wendi Muse wrote:

    jane aronson was on the news this morning promoting the blog and explaining general problems and benefits that come with adopting. she seemed genuinely connected to the issue, so it’s a shame that as a blog author, she is not allowing the voices of certain adoptees, future and present adoptive families, and adoption-related activists to come through…

    Posted 17 Nov 2007 at 11:43 pm ¶

43. Brian wrote:

    And yet they still chose to censor her.

    They removed or didn’t approve comments. That is not censorship; by definition only the State can censor.

    If the NYT removes comments or does not approve of content, it’s not censorship, it’s time to read another newspaper.

    And, yes, bring attention on the issue via the internets.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 1:24 pm ¶

44. ky adoptee wrote:

    I found this post that mentions Janowitz and some of the other blogs on one of our local paper’s websites.

    http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/vel14/2007/11/serious-saturday-adoption-edition.html

    I don’t really understand how the NYT could censor its commentors unless they were using profanity or personal attacks, etc.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 5:32 pm ¶

45. Cynthia wrote:

    They’ve pretty much posted all of my responses, including the one about CHASPs.

    Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 10:32 am ¶