A recent article in The New York Times is drawing scrutiny for its coverage of the controversy surrounding Bryon Noem, husband of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem. Critics allege the article frames Mr. Noem as a victim, minimizing his role in the situation involving explicit photos that surfaced online.

Focus on Kristi Noem's Actions

The article, according to reports, suggests that Kristi Noem’s actions and public profile contributed to the situation. It quotes a local real estate appraiser stating, “People know Bryon as the supportive husband who worked to maintain a normal family life as Kristi’s profile skyrocketed… Kristi invited this type of coverage by her actions at the Department of Homeland Security.”

Limited Attribution of Blame

The report indicates difficulty in finding individuals who directly blamed Bryon Noem for his behavior. The Times reportedly “salted the piece with people who would tell them what they want to hear — to blame Kristi Noem.” Only a former Democratic state senator and a “conservationist” were quoted as directly blaming the Governor.

Allegations of Political Motivation

The article’s framing is attributed to a strong bias against Governor Noem. The author contends that the far-left media consistently portrays her negatively, refusing to offer sympathy or portray her as a victim, even in situations where she is personally affected.

Normalization of Destructive Behavior

The author further suggests the coverage is part of a broader effort to normalize “deviance” and destructive behavior, linking it to the left’s support for issues like the transgender movement. The argument is that normalizing such behavior ultimately aims to destabilize families.

Focus on Impact on Family

Despite unconfirmed rumors regarding Kristi Noem, the author emphasizes that Bryon Noem bears sole responsibility for his actions, particularly given the impact on their children and grandchildren. The article highlights the emotional violence inflicted upon his family, stating, “This is a man committing emotional violence against innocent family members, the very people he has a duty to protect.”

Neither Bryon nor Kristi Noem have publicly denied the authenticity of the photos. The author concludes that Bryon Noem’s behavior was profoundly selfish and self-indulgent, disregarding the potential devastation to his family.