White House Press Office rejects emails from reporters who include pronouns in their signatures, sparking debate over whether the policy serves legitimate truth-seeking or discriminates against specific journalists.
At a Glance
- The Trump White House Press Office is not responding to reporters who display pronouns in their email signatures
- Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the policy, stating reporters with pronouns “cannot be trusted to write honest stories”
- The New York Times reported three instances of press office rejections based solely on pronoun inclusion
- The policy aligns with broader Trump administration directives removing “gender ideology” from federal communications
- Critics view the approach as both concerning and counterproductive to transparent government communications
New Press Office Policy Raises Media Access Questions
President Trump’s White House Press Office has implemented a policy of not responding to journalists who include pronouns in their email signatures. The controversial stance, confirmed by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, has been applied on at least three occasions according to reporting by New York Times journalist Michael Grynbaum. The press office justifies its position by claiming that reporters who display pronouns deny “biological reality” and cannot be trusted to produce fair coverage of the administration.
Department of Government Efficiency Senior Adviser Katie Miller has similarly refused to engage with reporters whose email signatures include pronouns. White House Communications Director Steven Cheung defended the policy by redirecting criticism toward The New York Times, suggesting the publication should focus on accurate reporting rather than email formatting preferences.
Part of Broader Federal Directive on Gender Language
The email pronoun policy appears to be one component of a wider Trump administration effort to remove what it terms “gender ideology” from federal communications. Federal agencies have been directed to scrub mentions of gender-related terminology from websites, contracts, and emails following presidential orders. The State Department specifically instructed employees to remove gender-specific pronouns from email signatures and changed the term “gender” to “sex” in official documents while eliminating the “X” gender marker option from passport applications.
“All employees are required to remove any gender identifying pronouns from email signature blocks by 5:00 PM today. Your cooperation is essential as we navigate these changes together,” wrote Tibor Nagy in a directive to State Department employees.
Trump’s Executive Orders mandate defining sex as exclusively male or female on official documents and policies. When asked about removing pronouns from federal emails during his campaign, Trump responded: “I don’t know. That doesn’t sound like a bad idea to me.”
Military Policy Reversal Shows Legal Complications
The administration’s approach to pronouns has faced legal hurdles in some contexts. The Air Force recently reversed a Trump-era ban on pronouns in official communications after discovering it conflicted with the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, which prohibits the Pentagon from establishing any pronoun policies. This inconsistency forced military leadership to backtrack on earlier directives.
“The Department of the Air Force updated the guidance to comply with federal law after it was brought to our attention the policy was not in line with the fiscal year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act,” a spokesperson for the Air Force explained regarding the reversal.
The pronoun ban was initially implemented as part of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s broader initiative to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion policies from military operations. This included removing DEI-related content from websites and canceling identity-focused observance months, actions that generated significant controversy and partial reinstatement of some content.
Media Organizations Push Back on Restrictions
News organizations have expressed concern about the White House’s approach. A New York Times spokesperson described the press office’s refusal to answer questions based on email signature formatting as “concerning and baffling.” The pushback reflects growing tension between the administration’s communication policies and journalists’ expectations of governmental transparency and equal access regardless of personal expression in professional communications.
The administration’s broader efforts have also included disbanding employee resource groups, terminating related grants and contracts, and removing public health information including resources on HIV and transgender issues from government websites. Critics argue these actions go beyond administrative efficiency and could impact both press freedom and the delivery of crucial public information to vulnerable communities.
