The New York Times Hunts for an Anonymous White Male Dissent

Tim Graham
Thu, 07 May 2026 16:29:42 -0700
Opinion

Leftists in the media cannot stand the idea that Team Trump is coming to the defense of white males at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They believe white males should never file a complaint, given their centuries of massive white male privilege.

Last week, The New York Times reported scornfully on how discrimination claims by white men and Jews are "Discrimination Cases That Match Trump's Agenda," according to their headline. In their view, the EEOC should always match the leftist agenda. It's supposed to be a captive agency of the Left under every administration.

This week, the EEOC sued The New York Times for discrimination against a white male employee who applied for a deputy real estate editor position. Despite experience in real-estate journalism, he was excluded from the final pool of candidates, which was composed of a white female, a black male, an Asian female and a multiracial female. The multiracial female won the job, despite a lack of experience in real-estate journalism.
Updated: Fri May 08, 2026

Leftists in the media cannot stand the idea that Team Trump is coming to the defense of white males at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They believe white males should never file a complaint, given their centuries of massive white male privilege.

Last week, The New York Times reported scornfully on how discrimination claims by white men and Jews are "Discrimination Cases That Match Trump's Agenda," according to their headline. In their view, the EEOC should always match the leftist agenda. It's supposed to be a captive agency of the Left under every administration.

This week, the EEOC sued The New York Times for discrimination against a white male employee who applied for a deputy real estate editor position. Despite experience in real-estate journalism, he was excluded from the final pool of candidates, which was composed of a white female, a black male, an Asian female and a multiracial female. The multiracial female won the job, despite a lack of experience in real-estate journalism.

The lawsuit argues the hiring manager at the Times greenlit this external candidate for inclusion in the final interview panel without her first going through the standard interview processes for the position. Moreover, she was chosen despite the company's own final interview panel rating her less favorably than two other final candidates.

Times spokeswoman Danielle Rhoades Ha claimed the suit was "meritless" and the administration is "blatantly weaponizing a traditionally independent government body to serve a predetermined narrative." When they say "independent," they mean liberal. The "predetermined narrative" in this case is exposing the newspaper's own publicly stated racial and gender quotas.

But here's the really fun part. Charlotte Klein at New York magazine lined up angry anonymous sources inside the paper hunting for this anonymous dissident. Turnabout is fair play, but now the aggressive weaponizers of anonymous sources can't stand their own game in reverse.

Klein relayed: "Reporters at the paper have been scrambling to figure out the employee's identity, driven in part by bafflement that one of their own colleagues would sell out the paper to the administration, which has used tools of the federal government to attack the press." Another staffer complained it's a "(poop)show behind the scenes — people trying to figure out who the aggrieved person is."

Every day in many ways, The New York Times is using anonymous warriors to attack the administration, and apparently, they shouldn't have to face their own tactics. One anonymous reporter complained, "You're giving the Trump administration a weapon while they're trying to persecute journalists." Attack them and they're "persecuted." When they attack you, it's Journalism.

Inevitably, an anonymous jerk had to proclaim it "absurd" that a white male has filed a discrimination complaint. "I'm sorry, there are plenty of white guys at the top of the New York Times. Not really something that's holding you back." That's wrong. That perception — that there are too many white guys editing the paper — is what creates "affirmative" discrimination.

This controversy at the Times underlines what we all know — that the words "diversity," "equity" and "inclusion" are devoid of all meaning when deployed by the Left. They can't stand diverse viewpoints, they don't want them included, and "equity" is a code word for creating a new policy where white men get exactly the reverse discrimination they deserve for about 400 years.