Your gift is matched today!

Double your donation's impact on our newsroom today during our June member drive.
1,535 sustainers of 2,500 goal
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.

This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.

News

LA Times Polices Itself Over Accusations of Sexist Writing

latimes.jpg
Photo by Kevin Britton via the LAist Featured Photos pool

This story is free to read because readers choose to support LAist. If you find value in independent local reporting, make a donation to power our newsroom today.

After announcing that Vanessa and Kobe Bryant had filed for divorce, the LA Times reported that the Lakers star's soon-to-be ex-wife stands to collect a "windfall" during their settlement.

Vanessa could indeed be awarded up to $75 million, but according to a blog post at the Times today, a reader pointed out -- and rightly so -- that the use of the word "windfall" smacked not just a little bit of sexism:

Reader Pam Wilson of San Diego said she found this description "blatantly sexist." "The premise is that Bryant's wife, Vanessa, does not deserve half of the couple's community property," Wilson emailed. "She is getting a 'windfall,' i.e. something she does not deserve, because obviously, Kobe was the one earning the money."

In response, the Times decided to self-police (not a bad idea, lest the subjects of this story be reduced to stereotypes). Staff writer Deirdre Edgar turned to the Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Edition, to find out how the word in question is actually defined, and turned up the following description: "any unexpected acquisition, gain, or stroke of good luck."

So Wilson's interpretation of "windfall" wasn't exactly right, but then again, neither was the Times'. Edgar makes the point that the settlement won't have anything to do with luck, but rather, will be in accordance with the law: since the Bryants didn't have a prenup, Vanessa is entitled to half of their community property. All that said, Edgar concludes that "'windfall' wasn't the right word."

You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our connected community. We are free to tell the full truth, to hold power to account without fear or favor, and to follow facts wherever they lead. Our only loyalty is to our audiences and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen our community.

Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive from readers like you will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.

If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.

Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief

Make your tax-deductible donation today