US

Vox Allegedly Rejects Op-Ed For ‘Implying Opposition To Abortion’

Vox.com screenshot

Daily Caller News Foundation logo
Blake Neff Reporter
Font Size:

Editors at the news website Vox have been accused of soliciting an ethics piece from a Swedish philosophy professor, only to reject it after worrying the piece could be too easily used as an argument against abortion rights.

The allegation comes from the blog of Brian Leiter, a University of Chicago law professor who also writes extensively on philosophical topics. Leiter shared the story of Stockholm University professor Torbjorn Tannsjo, who was solicited by Vox writer Dylan Matthews to write an article about the repugnant conclusion, a philosophical paradox involving the idea that a world with more people living lower-quality lives is preferable to a world with fewer people living higher-quality lives, as long as the overall amount of happiness is higher. Matthews asked Tannsjo to write, in an accessible format, a summary of his argument in favor of “accepting” the conclusion, which amounts to an argument that encourages people to have more children.

Tannsjo complied, and produced a piece which argues that people have a “moral duty” to have more children for the purpose of increasing the amount of total happiness in the world.

But instead of seeing his piece run by Vox, Tannsjo says he received the silent treatment, before finally reaching out to ask what had happened. In response, Tannsjo says he received the following reply from Matthews:

Afraid I have to be the bearer of bad news, Torbjörn. I ran the piece by some other editors and they weren’t comfortable running it; I think the concern is that people will misinterpret it as implying opposition to abortion rights and birth control, which, while I know it’s not your intent, is a real concern.

I’m sorry to waste your time; I really am a big fan of your work and appreciate your willingness to work with me.

Ironically, Matthew’s original email soliciting Tannsjo’s piece said the website was seeking thinkers who would argue “for provocative and/or counterintuitive propositions that our readers might find intriguing.”

Leiter, who is hardly conservative himself, quipped on his blog that the incident shows “how difficult it is to translate [abstract reasoning] for a mass audience which apparently is more concerned with taking the ‘correct’ view than with the reasoning.”

Vox’s gunshy attitude certainly isn’t a product of being unwilling to wade into the abortion debate. Just days ago, it ran a lengthy piece by correspondent Amanda Taub arguing strongly against abortion restrictions.

Vox defines itself as a general news source whose purpose is to “explain the news” without adhering to a particular strict ideological line.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reached out to Matthews for comment and has not yet received a reply.

Update: Vox editor-in-chief Ezra Klein has made a post regarding Tannsjo piece, stating that he made the decision not to run it.

“I am very, very uncomfortable telling anyone that it is their obligation to bear child after child, starting at the moment of first fertility and ending only at menopause,” Klein said. “And I didn’t think the piece made its case convincingly enough for us to stand behind a conclusion so sweeping and dramatic.”

Klein said his decision not to run the piece was also influenced by the fact that it was originally solicited for a special section dedicated to unusual arguments, which Vox ultimately chose not to launch.

He defended against claims of bias by saying that Vox has several pro-life staff members and has made job offers to two pro-life political reporters (though the two reporters were not hired). He also pointed to a profile of March for Life attendees the site published last January as proof the site has covered the anti-abortion movement in a non-hostile manner.

Follow Blake on Twitter

Send tips to blake@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.