The piece in which a reporter admits the media punished Hillary Clinton with excessive “but her emails” coverage because her team treated their non-story like… a non-story. https://t.co/ZEvy1LWqsA
— The Hoarse Whisperer (@TheRealHoarse) February 11, 2022
… with something other than glory. Phillip Bump is usually better than this, so I assume a Defcon 2 all-points alert must’ve gone out:
… This has been a lengthy exegesis, I admit, but it reiterates a few important points. First, that Clinton’s position in 2016 combined with the novelty of the question at issue were factors that don’t map cleanly onto the current scenario with Trump. Second, that the idea there was voluminous attention paid to Clinton-related emails in the last weeks of the campaign is inflated by the emails released by WikiLeaks, emails which were not ones from her server. And, third, that while the coverage of the server was probably broader than it needed to be in retrospect, it was often driven by news-related events. The media covered that late-October announcement about the investigation being reconsidered, often while emphasizing uncertainty about what it meant. Should it not have?
Consider, too, that the initial story told us something new about Clinton: that this candidate running a campaign predicated on her experience had worked around governmental rules and constraints. Learning this about Trump is … not new. This is also earlier in the presidential election cycle and, for Trump, represents not an apparent apex of his alleged misbehavior but something much lower on that pyramid.
What’s most important to remember when comparing the Trump and Clinton situations, though, is that we are comparing 20 months of reporting on Clinton with a week of reporting on Trump. We don’t know what the months between now and 2024 will bring. We can’t. The National Archives has asked the Justice Department to begin an investigation, so we’re not yet at the equivalent November 2016, merely August 2015. We will see what happens…
Look, everyone in the Beltway media already knew Donald Trump was a thieving loser! But we had to work really hard to convince y’all that Hillary was as terrible as we wanted to believe she was!
"They didn't treat us with the respect we feel we so richly deserve, so we got Trump elected instead" is quite the take to expect to get a sympathetic listen.
— Jerry's gone (@Jerrysgone1) February 11, 2022
There were 650+ straight days of coverage with hourly updates and daily polling about her "trustworthiness". At the same time, she was putting out policy idea after policy idea and there are members of the media who, to this day, still claim, "I don't know what she stood for."
— EILUJB (@Va2021J) February 11, 2022
How does it feel to be a
catspaw useful idiot for Fox News, Mr. Bump?
so weird how this narrative immediately appeared the second trump got caught stealing classified documents https://t.co/v9oSUPRrIR
— kilgore trout, cryptopolice chief (@KT_So_It_Goes) February 11, 2022