The New York Times' grotesque obsession

Everyone dies. We probably would all prefer no-one know what our bodies look like when they're found. There are better ways to be remembered.

But if you died of an overdose, and are unlucky enough to have The New York Times cover it, thousands of strangers will know only a few things about you. The drugs you took, maybe a bit of sordid family history, and finally the positioning, excretions, or autopsy details of your corpse. The most recent example of this was published Monday—about a sixteen year old boy who died in his bedroom, and whose autopsy revealed not fentanyl but cychlorphine, a more novel synthetic opioid.

The first image we get of Daniel Paul Lacourte, who passed away in April, is a graphic description of how his mother found his body. We know this before we even learn his name.

Introducing someone who is still legally a child this way is an especially egregious choice. But in the greater context of NYT's overdose reporting, it is not surprising. An earlier piece about orphines, the same class of opioids detected in Lacourte's autopsy, includes graphic passages reducing people who lost their lives to contorted props in a crime procedural. A story about synthetic drugs in Cook County Jails again features a corpse in an undignified pose. Nothing about who he was.

NYT might justify these editorial decisions by claiming they are raising awareness. But by introducing people who use drugs as cadavers and not people, the publication is reiterating the idea that their lives are disposable. How and whether someone's body is displayed after death is usually a personal decision they make with their family—based on personal values, beliefs, and a desire for dignity. In most societies, displaying a dead body is only considered respectful in a context that also honors the person's life.

By robbing their subjects of that choice, NYT shows its own underlying value system when it comes to drug reporting.

Want to stay up to date on drug analysis? Subscribe now!