|
Traditional journalism training often treats a reporter’s personal identity as something that must be put aside to achieve objectivity. How can an intersectional background actually enhance, rather than compromise, a reporter’s journalistic accuracy and rigor?
Levi: Regardless of what kind of identity, having knowledge of the communities you cover is helpful. If you’re from a rural community, you bring insights and nuance to reporting on rural issues that someone who grew up in the suburbs won’t naturally have.
It’s the same when covering LGBTQ+ health issues. Living as a queer person gives me a level of nuance, context, and perspective that can make my reporting on those issues more accurate and effective. Of course, these are all things that someone from outside the community can learn, but there are definitely a lot of benefits to having lived experience when reporting on all sorts of communities.
When covering highly contested or sensitive community beats, how do you utilize your unique identity to build authentic rapport with sources who are normally deeply distrustful of mainstream media?
Levi: In health policy reporting, we often speak with patients sharing deeply personal experiences with mental health or addiction — topics that are vulnerable to discuss publicly. I always want to explain their role in the piece clearly and how their firsthand experience is valuable in helping the public and policymakers understand what it actually feels like to go through whatever they’ve experienced. I try to build trust with sources by showing up, acknowledging their fears directly, and being transparent about my reporting process.
Source trust also goes both ways. When sources look at a newsroom and see staff members who share their experiences, it shows that the outlet is equipped to tell their story fairly and accurately.
What practical advice do you have for an editor who wants to support an intersectional reporter on a tough beat without accidentally siloing them or tokenizing their identity?
Levi: Be open to listening without being defensive. When a reporter explains why a story should or shouldn’t be handled a certain way, an editor should ask thoughtful questions to understand where that thinking is coming from.
A good editor treats every reporter with the same standards. They shouldn’t be overly skeptical of a queer reporter or reporter of color while uncritically accepting the pitch of a white male reporter, nor should they just blindly accept every idea from a reporter from a marginalized background.
Lived experience can give a reporter deep empathy, but it can also make covering identity-targeted news cycles emotionally taxing. What boundaries or practices do you use to protect your mental health while maintaining professional excellence?
Levi: I set hard boundaries around working hours whenever possible. Yes, we have deadlines, but we try to ask, “Does this really need to happen today, or can it happen tomorrow?” We take our work seriously, and we’re willing to put in that effort, but we also know that we’re all people at the end of the day.
As I’ve moved more into an editor and management role, there are a lot more hard decisions to make, and it’s easy to run those through your head over and over again and stress about the outcome. At the end of the day, you just have to make the best decision you can at the time, move on, and know that it’s going to be OK. Having a life outside of work helps put that pressure into perspective.
What risks are involved in leaning on your identity when working as a journalist?
Levi: In nonpartisan journalism, the primary risk is the perception of bias, which you can’t entirely control. Certain audiences will assign bias to you simply based on your identity or an organization you belong to. You can, however, control your work and public presence. Even though the industry has moved away from the outdated notion that journalists must be completely blank slates with no personal lives, there’s still a distinction between views you share with your loved ones and public journalism.
When statements about human existence — like affirming that trans people exist — are politically contested, lines can get blurry. Every journalist has to decide where they can provide the most value. Navigating that line requires clarity about your goals and standards.
Where is mainstream media still falling short when reporting on queer communities, and what practical changes should editors make to fix those coverage gaps?
Levi: As a queer man consuming news, I see a lot of great coverage of queer communities, but it could always be better. The Trans Journalists Association and NLGJA are both great resources for newsrooms looking to improve and deepen their coverage of trans and queer communities. Editors should listen to their queer — and non-queer — journalists if they raise concerns about their coverage, and they should strive to make sure their coverage of trans and queer communities is as varied, nuanced, and rigorous as any other topic they cover.
| 
