Readers critique The Post: Show some more team Spirit

With record-breaking crowds filling Audi Field, maybe the Spirit doesn’t need your coverage to bring in fans. But, with rising stars such as Croix Bethune bringing a new energy to the game, maybe our local National Women’s Soccer League franchise could attract more readers to The Post if you were to report on the Spirit more consistently.

Eric Boyle, Vienna

The Women’s PGA Championship is a major tournament, much like the men’s U.S. Open. But it does not seem worth much to The Post. The June 23 Sports Spotlight: Golf, “Young posts a 59 at Travelers Championship,” focused on a weekly PGA Tour event, while the Women’s PGA Championship merited just small mention in the Day in Sports section. And then to top it off, the leaderboard listing in the Scoreboard section said that it contained the scores for the third round of play, even though it appears to list the players’ performances in only the first two rounds.

Come on, give the women the respect they deserve. Golf has one of the biggest gender pay gaps in professional sports. How about at least recognizing women’s skills when they play one of their majors, which takes as much of a mental toll on them as it does the men and is just as significant of an accomplishment.

Tom Deyo, Bethesda

I am a little behind on reading the paper. But, nevertheless, when I opened the June 9 paper, I was looking forward to an article on the front page of the Sports section about Iga Swiatek winning the French Open and becoming just the third woman in the Open era to win three straight French Open titles. But such an article did not appear on the section front, nor was it even previewed there. Appalled, I kept flipping the pages just to find the story buried on Page D10.

The next day, however, most of the Sports front page was dominated by the article on Carlos Alcaraz winning the men’s title in the French Open. Why is that? Why is a woman’s great win buried on the 10th page while a man’s is front and center? Is it because of chauvinism? Obliviousness? Or am I missing something else? Sports deserve the same coverage regardless of the gender of the players.

Agnieszka Pukniel, Cheverly

I find the current discussion and warnings about “ultra-processed” foods confusing, and unfortunately Anahad O’Connor’s June 18 Eating Lab column, “Processing can rob plant foods of benefits,” left me even further in the dark. Where is the line between processed in some way and “ultra” processed? How much do ingredients matter versus manipulation of the original food?

I like the plant-based meat substitutes from Beyond Foods, and I’m willing to believe they are ultra-processed in order to create such meat-like products. How could it be otherwise? The same for those products that are specifically designed to promote consumption, such as many “junk” foods.

But the column mentions potato chips and fries as ultra-processed, while also saying that a list of unfamiliar ingredients is a tip-off. Most good-quality chips contain potatoes, oil and salt, and little else. They are cut, fried, salted and packaged. How is this ultra-processing? Since no one is inclined to eat raw potatoes, it would seem that any preparation meets the definition that would include these chips.

Breakfast cereals are a mystery, and I’m guessing that turning grains into flakes and other shapes is pretty serious processing. But is it “ultra,” and does it cause cereals to be less nutritious or somehow harmful? What about coffee and chocolate, which require a lot of manipulation from plant to end product?

I would love an article that explains the parameters clearly, and lays out what kinds of processing matter and which have little effect, instead of using blanket terminology that’s poorly defined and often contradictory. If the science isn’t clear, say it isn’t clear and leave out the generalizations.

Eric Wenocur, Olney

The June 23 obituary “Artist behind many notable inscriptions came from stone-carving lineage” omitted an important fact about John Everett Benson’s brilliant career. He carved the two dates “1959” and “1975” on the walls of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the only letterings to be engraved by hand. A gentleman, he even invited me to climb the ladder and take a few taps at the chisel so I could make a mark on history.

Robert W. Doubek, Washington

The writer was a founder, executive director and project director of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund.

The June 21 front-page article “In 1964, the Klan killed three young activists and shocked the nation” left out an important fact about the murder of three civil rights workers in Philadelphia, Miss. Mickey Schwerner and Andrew Goodman were White but they were also Jewish. Nowhere in the article is that facet of their identity mentioned.

Why is this so important? In today’s world of falsehoods and fake news accompanied by a rise in antisemitism, it’s crucial to preserve in public memory the rich history of Jewish civil rights advocacy. Outwardly, most American Jews might appear to be White if judged only by the color of their skin. But Jews are not White in the eyes of the antisemites on both the left and the right. To them, we are “the other,” unacceptable and distrusted. The rise of antisemitism on college campuses offers only the latest example of that fact.

The Jewish faith, and those of us who practice it, have always emphasized the importance of active pursuit of tikkun olam, making the world a better place for all its people. That is the underlying motivation for our involvement on behalf of those who are marginalized in society. If the fact that Schwerner and Goodman were Jewish is omitted, then the story is incomplete and newer generations of Americans will not know or appreciate the sacrifices made by them and others.

This matters because the increasing isolation Jews feel in America is due in part to the abandonment of us by those whom we supported and with whom we marched.

Robert F. Tropp, Silver Spring

I was disappointed that the June 21 Style article “Swifties for Palestine” failed to mention, even just in passing, the 250 hostages taken by Hamas during the Oct. 7 attack. Though it is reasonable to ask questions about the motives of some Israeli government officials for continuing the war, a primary concern for the Israeli public is the return of both the remaining living hostages and the bodies of those killed in captivity. It should be a standard practice in any Post article about the war to mention the hostages along with the 1,200 people killed on Oct. 7 and the 37,000 people in Gaza who have been killed in the subsequent war. Omitting the hostages is a dereliction of The Post’s commitment to report the full truth.

Ethan Leifman, Washington

After the recent concerns about starvation in Gaza, it is surprising not to see an article reporting the conclusions of the Famine Review Committee, which were published in June. The FRC, which is composed of five experts on food security and nutrition, is part of the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification program, a global partnership formed to analyze food supply and help governments and nongovernmental organizations make decisions about nutrition and food access.

In March, the FRC projected imminent famine in northern Gaza by the end of May. This warning was widely disseminated by news outlets, including The Post. The June report concludes that in this region famine has been averted. That conclusion has not been covered in The Post; it should receive prominent attention to avoid the appearance of bias.

Sam Miles, Santa Monica, Calif.

The June 21 front-page obituary for Donald Sutherland, “‘Shape-shifty’ movie stalwart did it all,” mentioned his obscure, lone appearance on the classic British spy series “The Avengers.” And what a mesmerizing turn it was with Sutherland, then 31, playing a mysterious founder of a cult of killers in an Agatha Christie-like thriller, “The Superlative Seven.” It aired on ABC in April 1967, two months before the Oscar-winning war film “The Dirty Dozen” ignited his career.

Co-starring Charlotte Rampling, the episode was the first time I ever saw Sutherland perform, and his work made me a fan for life. Sutherland and Rampling, Diana Rigg and Patrick Macnee. It doesn’t get any better than that.

Harvey Solomon, Takoma Park

I noticed the chart published with the June 23 front-page article “Financially, Gen Z may be worse off than millennials” showed that for members of Gen Z, rent made up 19.8 percent of their expenses, compared with 6.8 percent for all ages. I’m having a difficult time getting my mind around that statistic, because I don’t know anyone whose rent is so low — not around the D.C. area, at least.

I’m a senior citizen living in a low-to-moderate-income senior citizen building in Germantown, which is about 25 miles from the heart of D.C. My rent is 47 percent of my income, and it has stayed around that percentage for the 11 years I’ve lived here.

Marsha Liebl, Germantown

I cannot overstate my displeasure with the “For You” popups that litter every page of The Post’s online experience. They are an annoyance at best, and when I am reading on my phone, they are a screen-hogging impediment to reading a story. I’ve clicked on enough garbage in my day to develop tendinitis in my mousing hand, and I don’t need an extra “get rid of this junk” click to close the “For You” box on every page of every story that I read. To me, this should be a reading experience, not an online game.

Steve Ongley, Madison, Conn.

The headline on the June 22 news article “Democrats plotting tax hikes on the rich and corporations” is the worst I’ve seen in The Post. Dictionary.com defines a plot as “a secret plan or scheme to accomplish some purpose, especially a hostile, unlawful, or evil purpose.” There is nothing secret about the legislators’ plans, as evidenced by their on-the-record quotes and meetings. And there is nothing hostile, unlawful or evil about wanting the rich to pay their fair share of taxes. Why did The Post not use the more neutral “Democrats planning tax hikes”?

Leon Rubis, Vienna

I think The Post accurately described the intentions of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) in a June headline about Democratic tax policy. The Oxford English Dictionary defines “plotting” as “secretly make plans to carry out an illegal or harmful action.” I am still waiting for an open and honest analysis and discussion of what each bracket’s fair share is. Who do you think pays the cost of increased corporate taxes? Inflation caused by Democratic policies functioned as a stealth tax that significantly raised the costs for staples such as food and fuel for everyone. In the same way and over time, corporate tax increases are passed along to the consumers of the companies’ products and services. The rich are only a very small percentage of that population and the least likely to be seriously affected.

As Congress considers changes to the tax code and new tax policies, lawmakers should take a lesson from the Hippocratic oath: First, do no harm.

Steve Henry, Springfield

The Post has run too many stories on shenanigans in The Post’s higher management that are of little interest to the ordinary reader. The Post should run stories on what is of interest to the reader.

As an addicted reader of the print edition for almost 50 years, I have some suggestions. The Post should run more local stories, always have at least two of them on the front page, and have more local reporters. It should sell the paper locally with contests, discount offers in supermarkets and preteen boys going door to door. The Post has no competition for printed local news. It should bring back the lottery numbers and a brief stock market summary. This will increase print readership, local advertisements and profits.

The Post should reduce the number of long stories covered by four reporters on topics of little interest to readers such as, to make up one example, the effects of climate change on Indigenous tribes in the Amazon. This will save money. The Post’s digital edition faces two tough competitors in the Wall Street Journal and New York Times. It should emphasize areas in which The Post is better. Certainly, The Post’s editorial and op-ed pages are much better than those of its competitors.

Charles Gordon, Gaithersburg

The Post is to be commended for its willingness to report on its leadership in a series of recent articles examining allegations that William Lewis tried to squash a potentially unfavorable story by NPR’s David Folkenflik and that then-incoming editor Robert Winnett had worked with a “thief” who used deceptive methods to obtain information. However, The Post’s reporting during these past few weeks regarding the turmoil at its top has, unfortunately, been too infrequent and often patchy, leaving readers like me to turn to other newspapers and media outlets for information regarding the swirling controversy.

In May 2016, Jeff Bezos, The Post’s owner and the founder of Amazon, argued that to protect our democracy, newspapers “have a very important role in making sure that there is light” shed on even the most powerful people and institutions. That view also applies to the newspapers themselves. Hidden agendas and other similarly questionable actions undermine journalism’s credibility. For journalism to be of use in protecting our democracy and other values, it must operate in the light of day.

Philippe Benoit, Washington

The June 17 news article “Future Post editor tied to self-described ‘thief’” reported critically on some unsavory ties between Robert Winnett, who was at the time slated to become executive editor of The Post, and John Ford, “a once-aspiring actor who” engaged in what is called “‘blagging’ — using misrepresentation to dupe others into revealing confidential information.”

The article distanced The Post from blagging: “At The Post and other major American news organizations, the use of deceptive tactics in pursuit of news stories violates core ethics policies.” But apparently those core ethics policies do not forbid The Post from publishing the fruits of actions that sound a lot like blagging. The June 11 news article “Alito talked about political divide on alleged secret recording” relied on surreptitious recordings made by a “liberal documentary filmmaker” who posed as “a religious conservative at a Supreme Court Historical Society annual dinner at the high court in D.C.” and baited Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. and his wife into making comments she posted on social media.

Publishing the product of blagging incentivizes blagging. Blaggers do not blag for their own personal entertainment. What good is a code of ethics when there are lots of people out there willing to employ deceptive tactics, and lots of “major American news organizations” willing, or even keen, to report the results?

Joseph A. Capone, Oakton