COWLITZ COUNTY NEWS: HOW MANY ADULTS HAVE TO ADVOCATE VIOLENCE AGAINST A CHILD BEFORE YOU HIT DELETE?
There is a difference between reporting on a controversial issue and deliberately turning a teenager into a public target. Apparently, Cowlitz County News has trouble understanding that distinction.
A local Camas cross-country runner recently qualified for the state competition. Instead of reporting on the athletic event, providing relevant background, or presenting a balanced account of the controversy surrounding Washington's athletic eligibility policies, Cowlitz County News decided to publish a politically charged post announcing that a "MALE" runner had taken yet another opportunity away from a "Biological Girl." They then used this transitioning teenager's athletic accomplishment as a political sales pitch for Initiative 638, asking followers whether they would vote YES and declaring, "Vote for the Girls. Vote for common sense."
That wasn't simply reporting on a sporting event. It was an editorial position packaged as breaking news, with a transitioning teenager placed squarely in the crosshairs. What happened in the comments afterward should embarrass every person associated with that page.
Adults were openly advocating violence against a transitioning teenager.
Let's take a look at some of the comments Cowlitz County News allowed to remain visible in its comment section. One commenter, Kyle Lohoefener, suggested that three boys should deliberately enter the girls' division to beat the transgender student, then encouraged doing the same thing in every sport where transgender athletes compete. He even referred to the boys who would do it as "three brave boys."
Rob George suggested someone should trip the teenager.
Doug Galloway invoked Tonya Harding, suggesting that while the student was getting X-rays, this student could also get some mental health help.
Three other people apparently found that comment entertaining enough to like it.
Josh Allen went considerably further, writing, "Castrate him if he wants to be a girls so bad."
Tom Danis suggested prosecuting the teenager for fraud.
Coop Er made comments about confronting the student's parents in a school parking lot, referring to transgender people as freakshows and suggesting they should be made unwelcome at school.
Other commenters called the student a pathetic little loser, a mentally ill piece of shit, a coward, and worse. One commenter even directed a homophobic slur at someone else in the discussion.
These aren't disagreements about athletic regulations. These are grown-ass adults discussing a transitioning teenager as though they aren't a human being sitting somewhere reading what they're saying about this kid. This is happening in the comment section of a local news page.
Where the hell is the editorial responsibility?
Cowlitz County News didn't merely stumble across an ugly conversation happening somewhere else. It created the original post, selected the language, framed the teenager as someone taking something away from girls, attached a political call to action, and provided the platform where the discussion unfolded. The screenshots show comments advocating physical harm, making threats by implication, using slurs, and directing personal abuse toward a minor.
I understand that a Facebook page cannot control every ridiculous thing someone types into a comment box. However, there is a difference between allowing people to disagree and allowing adults to use your platform to advocate violence against a child. Moderation is a thing. Editorial judgment is a thing. Basic human decency is also supposed to be a thing, although judging by this comment section, it appears to be in increasingly short supply. It's called a delete button and a block button. I know CCN is familiar with both because they preemptively block people and pages, such as the Documented Facebook page.
Then there's Cowlitz County News' response when someone questioned its reporting.
Brenda O'Connor pointed out the obvious problems with the original post. She questioned the lack of factual information, asked about the student's athletic history and medical circumstances, and questioned whether Cowlitz County News had made any effort to report both sides of the story. Instead of addressing those questions, the page responded directly to her:
"Cry harder. This is our page. You don't pay for anything and we make no money."
Seriously? That's the response from the people operating a page presenting itself as a local news source? Apparently, asking for journalistic integrity is an unreasonable demand when you're running a Facebook page and nobody is paying you.
Other commenters immediately piled onto Brenda, with one suggesting that her position demonstrated how dumb Democrats are and another declaring that anyone who disagreed was mentally unstable.
Brenda wasn't the only person questioning the narrative. Other commenters attempted to discuss the actual science, the proposed eligibility requirements, and the potential consequences for students. They were met with insults, accusations, and personal attacks.
One particularly telling exchange involved the proposed sex-verification requirements under Initiative 638. When Jessica Morgan questioned why girls should have to provide additional medical verification, Brandon Ericksen dismissed her concerns by arguing that children routinely visit doctors and that determining biological sex was no big deal.
Think about that for a minute. We're discussing requiring children to undergo additional verification of their biological sex in order to participate in school athletics. That raises legitimate questions about privacy, medical records, implementation, and the treatment of students. Dismissing those concerns with the argument that kids go to the doctor anyway doesn't make the questions disappear.
Brandon also had an interesting response to the argument that girls shouldn't have to surrender additional bodily autonomy to participate in school sports.
Meanwhile, another commenter, Noa, attempted to discuss the distinction between sex and gender, the research surrounding athletic performance, and the actual requirements of the initiative. Rather than engaging with the substance of the discussion, the conversation repeatedly devolved into personal insults and accusations. This is what happens when political outrage becomes more important than actually discussing an issue.
The transitioning teenager seems to have become the least important person in this entire conversation.
That is perhaps the most disturbing part. We have adults speculating about why this student transitioned, accusing this child of doing it to win races, questioning their medical treatment, demanding that their body be examined, suggesting they be prosecuted, and advocating physical violence.
Amy Dawson even confidently declared that she knew the student's motivation, claiming that this student switched teams because they were losing on the boys' team and wanted to win on the girls' team. How exactly does she know that? What medical records has she reviewed? What conversations has she had with this teenager? What actual evidence does she have regarding this child's intentions? Apparently, none of that matters when speculation fits the preferred narrative.
Let's be clear about something else. This is a minor child. They are not a politician, a legislative sponsor, a public official, or an adult who voluntarily entered a political debate. They are a student participating in a school sport. They are entitled to go to school, participate in activities, and exist within their community without having grown adults publicly discussing their body, suggesting they be castrated, threatening physical harm, or encouraging others to humiliate them.
People can disagree about athletic eligibility. They can debate legislation. They can have strong opinions about competitive fairness. None of that requires turning a child into a punching bag.
To be fair, there were some people in that comment section who actually remembered there was a human being involved here.
Sarah Blattner attempted to explain the science behind hormone treatment and pointed out how adults were treating transgender children like monsters. Her response? She was called a moron.
Isaiah Ingram challenged adults who were bullying the student, pointing out that whatever their opinions about athletic participation, bullying a child is unacceptable.
Janet Roy reminded people that transgender individuals are human beings who have not personally harmed the people attacking them.
Those comments are worth acknowledging because they demonstrate that not everyone participating in this discussion has abandoned their humanity.
Interestingly, Connie Dean stated that she voted NO on the initiative. Rather than simply acknowledging that people can disagree about a ballot measure, commenters accused her of betraying other women, called her a loser, and suggested she was responsible for allowing a boy to win. Apparently, even exercising your own right to vote is unacceptable if you don't vote the way the crowd demands.
Another commenter attempted to bring some perspective to the discussion by pointing out the hypocrisy of the arguments being made.
Here's what I want to know: What exactly does Cowlitz County News think its responsibility is?
If this is a news page, where is the reporting? Where is the effort to establish the relevant facts before publishing inflammatory claims about a minor? Where is the distinction between documented information and commenters' speculation about a teenager's medical history and personal motivations? Where is the moderation when people suggest castration, physical assault, and confrontations in school parking lots?
Where is the basic recognition that the subject of this story is a minor child who has to go back to school and live in this community after adults have spent an entire day publicly humiliating them?
If the response is that this is simply a Facebook page and nobody gets paid, perhaps the people running it should reconsider whether they want to present themselves as a local news source in the first place. You don't get to invoke the authority and credibility of journalism when it suits you and then dismiss questions about journalistic responsibility by telling people they don't pay you. That's not how credibility works.
You cannot claim to be protecting children while providing a platform for adults to bully one.
You cannot wrap a political campaign message in the language of breaking news, publish a photograph identifying a minor child as the villain, encourage your followers to take a political position, and then pretend you have no responsibility for what happens in the resulting discussion.
The issue here isn't whether every person agrees about transgender athletes. The issue is whether adults, particularly those operating a page presenting itself as a local news source, understand that children deserve protection from targeted harassment and threats.
Cowlitz County News had an opportunity to facilitate an informed discussion about a complicated issue. Instead, its comment section became a showcase of cruelty, speculation, bigotry, and adults advocating violence against a student. When someone questioned the page's conduct, its response was to tell them to cry harder. That's quite a statement about the standards being applied.
A student's athletic accomplishment should never become an invitation for adults to fantasize about hurting that child.
Cowlitz County News, you can support whatever athletic eligibility policies you want. You can advocate for legislation. You can publish opinions. If you're going to put a child in the middle of your political messaging, you have a responsibility to recognize the very real consequences of doing so.
A Facebook disclaimer doesn't absolve you of that responsibility. Neither does the fact that you don't make money. Certainly not the excuse that it's your page.
There is an underage student on the receiving end of this. Perhaps it's time the adults on your page remembered that.
A local Camas cross-country runner recently qualified for the state competition. Instead of reporting on the athletic event, providing relevant background, or presenting a balanced account of the controversy surrounding Washington's athletic eligibility policies, Cowlitz County News decided to publish a politically charged post announcing that a "MALE" runner had taken yet another opportunity away from a "Biological Girl." They then used this transitioning teenager's athletic accomplishment as a political sales pitch for Initiative 638, asking followers whether they would vote YES and declaring, "Vote for the Girls. Vote for common sense."
That wasn't simply reporting on a sporting event. It was an editorial position packaged as breaking news, with a transitioning teenager placed squarely in the crosshairs. What happened in the comments afterward should embarrass every person associated with that page.
Adults were openly advocating violence against a transitioning teenager.
Let's take a look at some of the comments Cowlitz County News allowed to remain visible in its comment section. One commenter, Kyle Lohoefener, suggested that three boys should deliberately enter the girls' division to beat the transgender student, then encouraged doing the same thing in every sport where transgender athletes compete. He even referred to the boys who would do it as "three brave boys."
Rob George suggested someone should trip the teenager.
Doug Galloway invoked Tonya Harding, suggesting that while the student was getting X-rays, this student could also get some mental health help.
Three other people apparently found that comment entertaining enough to like it.
Josh Allen went considerably further, writing, "Castrate him if he wants to be a girls so bad."
Tom Danis suggested prosecuting the teenager for fraud.
Coop Er made comments about confronting the student's parents in a school parking lot, referring to transgender people as freakshows and suggesting they should be made unwelcome at school.
Other commenters called the student a pathetic little loser, a mentally ill piece of shit, a coward, and worse. One commenter even directed a homophobic slur at someone else in the discussion.
These aren't disagreements about athletic regulations. These are grown-ass adults discussing a transitioning teenager as though they aren't a human being sitting somewhere reading what they're saying about this kid. This is happening in the comment section of a local news page.
Where the hell is the editorial responsibility?
Cowlitz County News didn't merely stumble across an ugly conversation happening somewhere else. It created the original post, selected the language, framed the teenager as someone taking something away from girls, attached a political call to action, and provided the platform where the discussion unfolded. The screenshots show comments advocating physical harm, making threats by implication, using slurs, and directing personal abuse toward a minor.
I understand that a Facebook page cannot control every ridiculous thing someone types into a comment box. However, there is a difference between allowing people to disagree and allowing adults to use your platform to advocate violence against a child. Moderation is a thing. Editorial judgment is a thing. Basic human decency is also supposed to be a thing, although judging by this comment section, it appears to be in increasingly short supply. It's called a delete button and a block button. I know CCN is familiar with both because they preemptively block people and pages, such as the Documented Facebook page.
Then there's Cowlitz County News' response when someone questioned its reporting.
Brenda O'Connor pointed out the obvious problems with the original post. She questioned the lack of factual information, asked about the student's athletic history and medical circumstances, and questioned whether Cowlitz County News had made any effort to report both sides of the story. Instead of addressing those questions, the page responded directly to her:
"Cry harder. This is our page. You don't pay for anything and we make no money."
Seriously? That's the response from the people operating a page presenting itself as a local news source? Apparently, asking for journalistic integrity is an unreasonable demand when you're running a Facebook page and nobody is paying you.
Other commenters immediately piled onto Brenda, with one suggesting that her position demonstrated how dumb Democrats are and another declaring that anyone who disagreed was mentally unstable.
Brenda wasn't the only person questioning the narrative. Other commenters attempted to discuss the actual science, the proposed eligibility requirements, and the potential consequences for students. They were met with insults, accusations, and personal attacks.
One particularly telling exchange involved the proposed sex-verification requirements under Initiative 638. When Jessica Morgan questioned why girls should have to provide additional medical verification, Brandon Ericksen dismissed her concerns by arguing that children routinely visit doctors and that determining biological sex was no big deal.
Think about that for a minute. We're discussing requiring children to undergo additional verification of their biological sex in order to participate in school athletics. That raises legitimate questions about privacy, medical records, implementation, and the treatment of students. Dismissing those concerns with the argument that kids go to the doctor anyway doesn't make the questions disappear.
Brandon also had an interesting response to the argument that girls shouldn't have to surrender additional bodily autonomy to participate in school sports.
Meanwhile, another commenter, Noa, attempted to discuss the distinction between sex and gender, the research surrounding athletic performance, and the actual requirements of the initiative. Rather than engaging with the substance of the discussion, the conversation repeatedly devolved into personal insults and accusations. This is what happens when political outrage becomes more important than actually discussing an issue.
The transitioning teenager seems to have become the least important person in this entire conversation.
That is perhaps the most disturbing part. We have adults speculating about why this student transitioned, accusing this child of doing it to win races, questioning their medical treatment, demanding that their body be examined, suggesting they be prosecuted, and advocating physical violence.
Amy Dawson even confidently declared that she knew the student's motivation, claiming that this student switched teams because they were losing on the boys' team and wanted to win on the girls' team. How exactly does she know that? What medical records has she reviewed? What conversations has she had with this teenager? What actual evidence does she have regarding this child's intentions? Apparently, none of that matters when speculation fits the preferred narrative.
Let's be clear about something else. This is a minor child. They are not a politician, a legislative sponsor, a public official, or an adult who voluntarily entered a political debate. They are a student participating in a school sport. They are entitled to go to school, participate in activities, and exist within their community without having grown adults publicly discussing their body, suggesting they be castrated, threatening physical harm, or encouraging others to humiliate them.
People can disagree about athletic eligibility. They can debate legislation. They can have strong opinions about competitive fairness. None of that requires turning a child into a punching bag.
To be fair, there were some people in that comment section who actually remembered there was a human being involved here.
Sarah Blattner attempted to explain the science behind hormone treatment and pointed out how adults were treating transgender children like monsters. Her response? She was called a moron.
Isaiah Ingram challenged adults who were bullying the student, pointing out that whatever their opinions about athletic participation, bullying a child is unacceptable.
Janet Roy reminded people that transgender individuals are human beings who have not personally harmed the people attacking them.
Those comments are worth acknowledging because they demonstrate that not everyone participating in this discussion has abandoned their humanity.
Interestingly, Connie Dean stated that she voted NO on the initiative. Rather than simply acknowledging that people can disagree about a ballot measure, commenters accused her of betraying other women, called her a loser, and suggested she was responsible for allowing a boy to win. Apparently, even exercising your own right to vote is unacceptable if you don't vote the way the crowd demands.
Another commenter attempted to bring some perspective to the discussion by pointing out the hypocrisy of the arguments being made.
Here's what I want to know: What exactly does Cowlitz County News think its responsibility is?
If this is a news page, where is the reporting? Where is the effort to establish the relevant facts before publishing inflammatory claims about a minor? Where is the distinction between documented information and commenters' speculation about a teenager's medical history and personal motivations? Where is the moderation when people suggest castration, physical assault, and confrontations in school parking lots?
Where is the basic recognition that the subject of this story is a minor child who has to go back to school and live in this community after adults have spent an entire day publicly humiliating them?
If the response is that this is simply a Facebook page and nobody gets paid, perhaps the people running it should reconsider whether they want to present themselves as a local news source in the first place. You don't get to invoke the authority and credibility of journalism when it suits you and then dismiss questions about journalistic responsibility by telling people they don't pay you. That's not how credibility works.
You cannot claim to be protecting children while providing a platform for adults to bully one.
You cannot wrap a political campaign message in the language of breaking news, publish a photograph identifying a minor child as the villain, encourage your followers to take a political position, and then pretend you have no responsibility for what happens in the resulting discussion.
The issue here isn't whether every person agrees about transgender athletes. The issue is whether adults, particularly those operating a page presenting itself as a local news source, understand that children deserve protection from targeted harassment and threats.
Cowlitz County News had an opportunity to facilitate an informed discussion about a complicated issue. Instead, its comment section became a showcase of cruelty, speculation, bigotry, and adults advocating violence against a student. When someone questioned the page's conduct, its response was to tell them to cry harder. That's quite a statement about the standards being applied.
A student's athletic accomplishment should never become an invitation for adults to fantasize about hurting that child.
Cowlitz County News, you can support whatever athletic eligibility policies you want. You can advocate for legislation. You can publish opinions. If you're going to put a child in the middle of your political messaging, you have a responsibility to recognize the very real consequences of doing so.
A Facebook disclaimer doesn't absolve you of that responsibility. Neither does the fact that you don't make money. Certainly not the excuse that it's your page.
There is an underage student on the receiving end of this. Perhaps it's time the adults on your page remembered that.
Comments
Post a Comment