My colleague Jay Cost flags this Newsweek article, which is ostensibly about the scandalous revelation that one of the largest Clinton Foundation donor has trade ties to Iran. But here’s the first paragraph:
Why on earth would a story about Clinton cashing large checks from a shady Ukranian oligarch be framed not about the scandal itself, but whether or not Hillary Clinton’s supposed “enemies” would use it to discredit her? If she has, in fact, done something wrong or inappropriate — she deserves to be discredited and/or judged by voters.
The worst reading of this is that the media is hopelessly biased in favor of Democrats, and to some latent degree actually buys into Hillary Clinton’s famous assertion that there’s a “vast right-wing conspiracy” out to get her. The most favorable interpretation of this is that the media is incapable of covering substantive facts in a straightforward manner, and always defaults to petty horse race coverage of the presidential race. And there’s always a possibility that it’s a little bit of both.
But any way you read this, it’s a reminder of how bad campaign coverage has been in recent elections. It’s going to be a long 18 months.
