Outstanding stuff as always, Margaret. My gut feeling is that you are correct and a hack of Biden/Harris would have been published by someone, somewhere, almost immediately in the name of “fairness”. Obviously it’s impossible to say what we are missing out on here, but the double standard is a bit galling.
Finally, I’d love to get your take on Maggie Haberman’s ultra defensive interview on NPR. I realize she catches a lot of flak which she must be tired of, but I remain gobsmacked at her lack of insight as to why those of us on the left find her history of journalism (which includes a lot of great work!) so troubling.
Another great post, Margaret! I would take the point about fear of Trump and the right wing, as a reason for not publishing the leaked materials, a step further: That fear, which also helps explain the “sanewashing” of Trump’s incomprehensible statements by the mainstream media and the rightward movement of the NYT and WPO, is totally self-defeating. Only the courage to say and print factual truth will save the media from MAGA.
If Trump is re-elected, no amount of leaning is his direction during the campaign will prevent him from destroying press freedom thereafter. He will keep his pledges to do so.
Thanks for mentioning the way the MSM treated Hillary. The MSM seems so very concerned about being fair to Trump and Republicans, but they’ll trash Democrats. In the guise of fairness, they fail to report the disaster that another Trump presidency would bring. Edward R Murrow has left the building.
The double standard exists whether they are afraid of trump of just want to damage Harris. Over the weekend the NYT had a headline story about Harris hurting herself by not answering questions. didn't say anything about trump's nonsensical answers. In reality, Harris did answer the questions but gave some of her personal history first, which defused 2 problems.
Voters say they don't know her, so she is trying to tell them whom she is which should be good. Secondly if the reporters had listened, Harris fully answered the questions
Literally since the first year I was a reporter, I have known journalists who had affairs with sources. It makes me want to hide my face in my hands. I can’t even fathom bringing sex into a source relationship. You will be found out, and it will follow you the rest of your career. It also makes things much more difficult for the rest of us, because news gets around, and those of us who keep our distance have to fend off innuendo.
One observation I’ve made from my 30-year career in mainstream journalism is how little self-reflection takes place. We’re all so busy questioning how other powerful institutions and people exercise their power that we rarely take the time to reflect on and question how we exercise our own power in ways that don’t necessarily always further the public interest and the interests of democracy.
I played a lot of basketball in high school and played well enough to earn a college scholarship. While in high school, I played for a coach who was well-respected, well liked, and a wonderful human being. He knew every referee and never complained about the officiating and, as a result, we never caught a break. During my schoolboy career, we lost more than one game due to blown calls. The refs knew my coach would never complain, never end a friendship, never change demeanor. In other words, there was no penalty for screwing the guy. Democrats are like my old coach. The Republicans in general, and Trump in particular have no floor. They bitch and scream and rant and rave so as a result, journalists are walking on egg shells around them. An exemplar - did you hear Hillary Clinton complain about the double standard surrounding new hacking? Has the vaunted media made any kind of case regarding Vance’s claim that “Republicans hate the right people”? Has the media pointed out the dichotomy of Trump the staunch supporter of Israel and Trump hosting Jew hating Arab sheiks at Mar-a-lago? There is little evidence to make any thinking person that the mainstream media as anything but reluctant to incur Trump’s wrath.
'Hoping upon hope that American "journalism without fear or favor" can be resuscitated at our major corporate news outlets. The asymetricality of their current approach is just so galling and unfair—and not matter what we say and how often, it feels like we are registering with entities with their fingers in their ears going "la-la-la-la-la can't hear you".
I think your skepticism is justified, Margaret! The press is behaving politically—making the same kind of insider calculations they love to report on. Until they focus more on journalistic values and transparently explain how those are guiding their news judgment, public distrust of their motives will continue. A humble acknowledgement of what they’re struggling with in their coverage would also help! Instead, we get stonewalling and self-justification.
You’re in such a great position to help the next generation of journalists be and do better! It really comes down to living by an ethical standard, which prevents the pitfalls of a double one. Keep fighting for that, Margaret, you’re not alone!
I saw a post on FB that claimed that in Montana early voting Harris/Walz were left of the absentee ballots. I tried to confirm the story and was only able to find bloggers and the Daily Mail reporting it.
Joyce Vance’s article today focused on a legal case in the 5th district courts allowing Mississippi to only count vote cast in person on election day. I also read there was an effort by Republicans to prevent college students ballots to be counted in several states.
It has become almost impossible to validate many of these stories.
Is this the cause on MSM ignoring these stories, or is this just as I refer to is SPAM?
Either way it should be addressed. The 18-29 yr. old vote have become a scare for Republicans in this coming election. What can be done to assure that their votes are counted?
I’ve come to exactly the same conclusion you’re hinting at: if Harris had been the target the emails would’ve been published, just like the Dem ones in 2016. Probably mostly because of media defensiveness re GOP attacks, but, unlike you, I’m pretty convinced at this point that much of the media is biased in favor of the GOP. In Josh Marshall’s words, DC is wired for Republicans, and that includes the political media. They have mixed feelings about Trump—appreciate that he’s newsworthy, but don’t like his style and recognize he’s weakened as a candidate—but he’s the GOP candidate, so they support him. If Haley was the candidate we would be seeing media tongue baths of her on a daily basis. She’d be the second coming of Reagan, who also got worshipful press coverage.
Students: And non-students, women, men, gender-fluid, earthlings, anyone over the age of two: Don’t send naked pictures of yourself to anyone, for any reason.
One of the worst things about this problem is precisely the situation your column describes: we don't know why major press institutions are behaving as they are about the Iran hacks because they feel no obligation to explain their behavior on almost anything, including the parallel 2016 hacks. So we're left to speculate, and the press organizations continue to rely on a "Trust us" attitude that long since lost its validity. Nothing requires these institutions to undertake the painful effort of accountability, and so they refuse to do so.
It's nice, perhaps, that Maggie Haberman at least acknowledged in her recent interview that media analysts she misperceived as "left wing" (such as yourself, James Fallows, Jay Rosen, Dan Froomkin, and a few others) actually exist. Her defensive dismissal of such people as a self-interested "industry," however, doesn't suggest any soon-coming engagement.
Of course the Press Corpse - The Bezos Bugle (WaPo); the Sulzberger Sniper, aka the Nation's Finest Fishwrap;, the former Tiger Beat on the Potomac that's now evolved into Volkischer Beobachter on the Potomac (Politico); News For Upper Middle Class Ivy League Low Achievers (Axios) - wouldn't publish this Iranian stuff, any more than they would publish anything else that reflects badly on the guy they desperately want to get back into office so they can regain all the viewers/readers they lost since January 2021 and reward the intergalactic widgetmakers who own them and want to sell them by becoming "profitable". "Learning from experience" is not something the Ivy League Low Achievers who become Journihilists are capable of.
Outstanding stuff as always, Margaret. My gut feeling is that you are correct and a hack of Biden/Harris would have been published by someone, somewhere, almost immediately in the name of “fairness”. Obviously it’s impossible to say what we are missing out on here, but the double standard is a bit galling.
Finally, I’d love to get your take on Maggie Haberman’s ultra defensive interview on NPR. I realize she catches a lot of flak which she must be tired of, but I remain gobsmacked at her lack of insight as to why those of us on the left find her history of journalism (which includes a lot of great work!) so troubling.
Another great post, Margaret! I would take the point about fear of Trump and the right wing, as a reason for not publishing the leaked materials, a step further: That fear, which also helps explain the “sanewashing” of Trump’s incomprehensible statements by the mainstream media and the rightward movement of the NYT and WPO, is totally self-defeating. Only the courage to say and print factual truth will save the media from MAGA.
If Trump is re-elected, no amount of leaning is his direction during the campaign will prevent him from destroying press freedom thereafter. He will keep his pledges to do so.
Thanks for mentioning the way the MSM treated Hillary. The MSM seems so very concerned about being fair to Trump and Republicans, but they’ll trash Democrats. In the guise of fairness, they fail to report the disaster that another Trump presidency would bring. Edward R Murrow has left the building.
The double standard exists whether they are afraid of trump of just want to damage Harris. Over the weekend the NYT had a headline story about Harris hurting herself by not answering questions. didn't say anything about trump's nonsensical answers. In reality, Harris did answer the questions but gave some of her personal history first, which defused 2 problems.
Voters say they don't know her, so she is trying to tell them whom she is which should be good. Secondly if the reporters had listened, Harris fully answered the questions
As I see it, there are five possible explanations for why news outlets haven’t published the contents of the leak:
1) The information isn’t newsworthy.
2) They don’t want to be seen as pawns of a foreign (and malign) actor – although that didn’t stop them in 2016.
3) They’re still digesting the import of the information (although many weeks on, that’s not likely) and may yet publish it.
4) They’ve decided the pros of publishing the information are outweighed by the cons of losing access to the Trump campaign.
5) They’re terrified of the blowback from the right-wing outrage machine and the vile smears and very real threats that are likely to ensue.
I put my money on No. 5.
What evidence is there the information isn’t newsworthy?
Literally since the first year I was a reporter, I have known journalists who had affairs with sources. It makes me want to hide my face in my hands. I can’t even fathom bringing sex into a source relationship. You will be found out, and it will follow you the rest of your career. It also makes things much more difficult for the rest of us, because news gets around, and those of us who keep our distance have to fend off innuendo.
One observation I’ve made from my 30-year career in mainstream journalism is how little self-reflection takes place. We’re all so busy questioning how other powerful institutions and people exercise their power that we rarely take the time to reflect on and question how we exercise our own power in ways that don’t necessarily always further the public interest and the interests of democracy.
Double standard …
I played a lot of basketball in high school and played well enough to earn a college scholarship. While in high school, I played for a coach who was well-respected, well liked, and a wonderful human being. He knew every referee and never complained about the officiating and, as a result, we never caught a break. During my schoolboy career, we lost more than one game due to blown calls. The refs knew my coach would never complain, never end a friendship, never change demeanor. In other words, there was no penalty for screwing the guy. Democrats are like my old coach. The Republicans in general, and Trump in particular have no floor. They bitch and scream and rant and rave so as a result, journalists are walking on egg shells around them. An exemplar - did you hear Hillary Clinton complain about the double standard surrounding new hacking? Has the vaunted media made any kind of case regarding Vance’s claim that “Republicans hate the right people”? Has the media pointed out the dichotomy of Trump the staunch supporter of Israel and Trump hosting Jew hating Arab sheiks at Mar-a-lago? There is little evidence to make any thinking person that the mainstream media as anything but reluctant to incur Trump’s wrath.
'Hoping upon hope that American "journalism without fear or favor" can be resuscitated at our major corporate news outlets. The asymetricality of their current approach is just so galling and unfair—and not matter what we say and how often, it feels like we are registering with entities with their fingers in their ears going "la-la-la-la-la can't hear you".
I think your skepticism is justified, Margaret! The press is behaving politically—making the same kind of insider calculations they love to report on. Until they focus more on journalistic values and transparently explain how those are guiding their news judgment, public distrust of their motives will continue. A humble acknowledgement of what they’re struggling with in their coverage would also help! Instead, we get stonewalling and self-justification.
You’re in such a great position to help the next generation of journalists be and do better! It really comes down to living by an ethical standard, which prevents the pitfalls of a double one. Keep fighting for that, Margaret, you’re not alone!
I saw a post on FB that claimed that in Montana early voting Harris/Walz were left of the absentee ballots. I tried to confirm the story and was only able to find bloggers and the Daily Mail reporting it.
Joyce Vance’s article today focused on a legal case in the 5th district courts allowing Mississippi to only count vote cast in person on election day. I also read there was an effort by Republicans to prevent college students ballots to be counted in several states.
It has become almost impossible to validate many of these stories.
Is this the cause on MSM ignoring these stories, or is this just as I refer to is SPAM?
Either way it should be addressed. The 18-29 yr. old vote have become a scare for Republicans in this coming election. What can be done to assure that their votes are counted?
And you didn't even mention the voter suppression campaign the republicans are running in Georgia and it is huge.
I’ve come to exactly the same conclusion you’re hinting at: if Harris had been the target the emails would’ve been published, just like the Dem ones in 2016. Probably mostly because of media defensiveness re GOP attacks, but, unlike you, I’m pretty convinced at this point that much of the media is biased in favor of the GOP. In Josh Marshall’s words, DC is wired for Republicans, and that includes the political media. They have mixed feelings about Trump—appreciate that he’s newsworthy, but don’t like his style and recognize he’s weakened as a candidate—but he’s the GOP candidate, so they support him. If Haley was the candidate we would be seeing media tongue baths of her on a daily basis. She’d be the second coming of Reagan, who also got worshipful press coverage.
I appreciate your perspective and thank you for writing about the current state of journalism.
It seems to me that the MSM is not doing their job and hasn't been for years now.
Students: And non-students, women, men, gender-fluid, earthlings, anyone over the age of two: Don’t send naked pictures of yourself to anyone, for any reason.
One of the worst things about this problem is precisely the situation your column describes: we don't know why major press institutions are behaving as they are about the Iran hacks because they feel no obligation to explain their behavior on almost anything, including the parallel 2016 hacks. So we're left to speculate, and the press organizations continue to rely on a "Trust us" attitude that long since lost its validity. Nothing requires these institutions to undertake the painful effort of accountability, and so they refuse to do so.
It's nice, perhaps, that Maggie Haberman at least acknowledged in her recent interview that media analysts she misperceived as "left wing" (such as yourself, James Fallows, Jay Rosen, Dan Froomkin, and a few others) actually exist. Her defensive dismissal of such people as a self-interested "industry," however, doesn't suggest any soon-coming engagement.
Of course the Press Corpse - The Bezos Bugle (WaPo); the Sulzberger Sniper, aka the Nation's Finest Fishwrap;, the former Tiger Beat on the Potomac that's now evolved into Volkischer Beobachter on the Potomac (Politico); News For Upper Middle Class Ivy League Low Achievers (Axios) - wouldn't publish this Iranian stuff, any more than they would publish anything else that reflects badly on the guy they desperately want to get back into office so they can regain all the viewers/readers they lost since January 2021 and reward the intergalactic widgetmakers who own them and want to sell them by becoming "profitable". "Learning from experience" is not something the Ivy League Low Achievers who become Journihilists are capable of.