USA Today's Editorial Lapses: From Stacey Abrams' Stealth-Edited Op-Ed to Stealth-Editing Braves Coverage

A series of bizarre editorial decisions by USA Today, including allowing Stacey Abrams to retroactively edit an op-ed without an editor's note and stealth-editing articles to remove references to the Atlanta Braves' team name, has raised eyebrows and drawn criticism from within the industry.

In a move that has sparked outrage, USA Today allowed Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams to revise an opinion article without an editor's note, watering down her support of boycotts after the MLB pulled its All-Star game from Atlanta. The original op-ed expressed support for boycotts, but the revised version emphasized the importance of keeping businesses in Georgia and speaking out against the state's election reform law.

Critics have accused USA Today of giving Abrams preferential treatment and undermining the integrity of the news outlet. They argue that allowing a politician to retroactively edit an op-ed without transparency raises concerns about bias and censorship. In response to the criticism, USA Today spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the oversight in updating the column has been rectified and procedures have been reviewed to prevent similar incidents in the future.

This latest incident is part of a pattern of questionable editorial decisions by USA Today. In March 2021, the newspaper published an op-ed from Abrams that appeared to support boycotts against Georgia. However, after the MLB pulled its All-Star game from Atlanta, USA Today allowed Abrams to retroactively edit her op-ed to water down her boycott support without placing an editor's note.

In a separate incident, USA Today was caught stealth-editing multiple pieces after its sports columnist decried the "racist" Atlanta Braves team name. The newspaper removed references to the "Braves" from the articles, including headlines, without acknowledging the changes with an editor's note.

USA Today has defended its actions, stating that the stealth-edits were an "oversight" and that the stories have been "corrected" with an editor's note. However, the incidents have raised questions about the newspaper's editorial standards and its commitment to transparency.

The editorial lapses by USA Today have drawn criticism from within the industry. David Mastio, a former deputy editorial page editor for USA Today, left Gannett in 2022 after roughly 25 years due to the newspaper's left-wing transformation. Mastio accused Gannett of writing off half of its readers by silencing conservative voices and promoting liberal viewpoints.

Mastio's departure came after a nasty feud with his former boss, Kristen DelGuzzi, who claimed that the opinion pages had "evolved" and that readers had shifted away from conservative opinions. However, Mastio argued that the opinion sections had become more liberal and that Gannett was alienating half of its potential customers.

The controversies surrounding USA Today have highlighted the challenges facing the news industry in the current political climate. As newspapers struggle to maintain their credibility and compete with digital news sources, they face pressure to appeal to both conservative and liberal readers. However, the line between objective reporting and biased opinions can sometimes be difficult to navigate, and editorial lapses like those by USA Today can undermine the trust of the public.

Gannett, the parent company of USA Today, has not responded to Fox News Digital's request for comment on the controversies.