NYT editor does damage control after readers revolt over report on Zohran Mamdani’s ‘black or African American’ Columbia application

On Thursday, the Times reported that Mamdani marked on his college application that he was "Asian" and also checked off that he was "Black or African American" as well. The report sparked backlash from the left. Mamdani was born in Uganda, but his family is of South Asian heritage. The information was also reportedly accessed through hacked data that was obtained by the outlet.

In a long X post thread, Times assistant managing editor Patrick Healy responded to the left-wing backlash against the outlet, saying that he wanted to provide "context" to the report.

"I’ve received reader feedback regarding our reporting on Zohran Mamdani’s 2009 application to Columbia University. To provide context on how the reporting came together, I wanted to share some information," Healy wrote, adding, "The Times has been reporting comprehensively on Mr. Mamdani’s proposals for the city, his vision on the economy and affordability, his leadership record and his personal background, including his biography and South Asian heritage that he’s talked about during his campaign."

Mamdani told the Times that he did not identify as an "African American" but as an "American born in Africa," when reporters reached out for comment, and he said that when he filled out the application, he was trying to represent his ethnic background given the choices on the college application, however, he was not accepted into Columbia where his mother also worked as a professor.

The Times added in its report that they "could not find any speeches or interviews in which Mr. Mamdani referred to himself as Black or African American," and said that "Columbia, like many elite universities, used a race-conscious affirmative action admissions program at the time. Reporting that his race was Black or African American in addition to Asian could have given an advantage to Mr. Mamdani, who was born in Uganda and spent his earliest years there."

Healy addressed this saying that the outlet thought that the checking of the boxes as well as Mamdani’s response was “newsworthy” to report on, and then added, “We sometimes receive information that has been hacked or from controversial sources. The Times does not solely rely on nor make a decision to publish information from such a source; we seek to confirm through direct sources, which we did with Mr. Mamdani.

“We heard from readers who wanted more detail about this initial source. That’s fair feedback. We printed his online alias so readers could learn more about the person. The purpose of this story was to help illuminate the thinking and background of a major mayoral candidate,” the Times editor concluded in his statement.

The suggestive critique of Mamdani drew backlash from those on the left, many of whom are in favor of race-based affirmative action.

Left-wing commentator Keith Olbermann responded to the post from the Times editor, claiming the report was an “absolute abrogation of the NYT standards.”

He then labeled the New York Times the “New York Post II.” Many others on the left were critical of the Times report. This comes after the outlet chose not to endorse a candidate, including Mamdani, in the New York mayoral race.