By Peter Daou and Tom Watson
Unbelievably, the New York Times has stepped in it yet again with shoddy Hillary Clinton coverage.
Here’s the lede and the correction… excuse us, the “update.”
Original Item: Hillary Rodham Clinton was directly involved in arranging a new government position for a top aide that allowed the aide to begin working for a private consulting firm while remaining at the State Department, according to documents released on Thursday. The documents, released by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, show that Mrs. Clinton personally signed forms establishing a new title and position for the aide, Huma Abedin, in March 2012.
Update: According to a document obtained by The New York Times, the certification of a new employment position for one of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s senior aides at the State Department was signed by Mrs. Clinton’s then chief of staff, Cheryl D. Mills, who was authorized to sign such documents for Mrs. Clinton.
This new misinformation follows months of scandalous behavior from the media and commentariat in which rank falsehoods have been spread about Hillary Clinton with nary an apology or admission of responsibility.
The most widely reported was the New York Times’s dangerous, wrong, and unethical allegation that Hillary was the subject of a criminal investigation.
Even worse, though largely unacknowledged, is the widespread use of a discredited and dishonest Quinnipiac poll, which #HillaryMen debunked within days of its release:
It was a lightning bolt from the polling universe: two weeks ago, Quinnipiac University found that the most cited description of the most admired woman in American politics was “liar.”
The media jumped on it. Commentators seized on it as definitive proof that the American electorate distrusts Hillary Clinton.
But the conclusion was a sham.
Back on August 29th, we deconstructed the poll, looked at the internals and found that it was highly misleading. While Quinnipiac presented the poll as evidence that voters associated “liar” with Hillary, we demonstrated that it was Republican and Republican-leaning respondents to the Q-poll who linked Hillary to liar and other derogatory terms (including “bitch”). It is a vastly different thing for Republicans, parroting Fox news and talk radio, to hurl misogynistic insults at Hillary than for all voters to believe Hillary is a liar.
The corporate media’s coverage of the 2016 election is quickly becoming a national disgrace, turning the riveting prospect of the first woman president into a verbal gang-assault of ugly and epic proportions.
Witness Washington Post reporter Chris Cillizza writing 50 (FIFTY) posts about Hillary’s emails.
Witness Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC, David Muir of ABC and Savannah Guthrie of NBC confronting Hillary and Chelsea Clinton with the deceptive and false Q poll calling Hillary a liar.
Witness the obsessive frat boy sexism of Morning Joe, sneering about Hillary’s outfits and spreading lies about her.
Witness Maureen Dowd conducting a vicious and personal anti-Clinton vendetta with the blessing of the NY Times leadership.
Witness CNN’s Wolf Blitzer hypothesizing with a Republican guest about whether Hillary committed a felony or a misdemeanor without a shred of evidence that she’s even the target of an investigation.
We leave it to Bernie Sanders to describe what this is:
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said on Sunday that some detractors dislike former secretary of State Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman.
Sanders argued that gender drives many of the attacks against his opponent for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.
“I can’t think of many personalities who have been attacked for more reasons than Hillary Clinton,” Sanders told host John Dickerson on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
“I don’t know that a man would be treated the same way that Hillary is,” he said. “Some of it is sexist.”
We reiterate our call for an apology by the media, both to Hillary and to the American public:
Hillary had the grace to apologize for her decision, now let's see the media and pundits show the same respect to her. America has spent 226 years without a female president. Hillary is the first woman with a viable chance to right that wrong.
All we ask for is fair and responsible coverage of her quest.
Thus far, that has been too much to ask. The national media have rivaled the fetid swamps of anonymous Clinton-bashers in their virulent attacks and obsessive reporting. It has been a sad and sorry spectacle, a verbal gang-assault on a dignified, accomplished, influential and incredibly popular woman.
Not every journalist and pundit has participated, but far too many have. It is disgraceful and we’ve chronicled it every step of the way.
Now is the time for a reset. History will judge those who defended the status quo and bolstered the ugly gender barrier in U.S. politics.
Peter Daou and Tom Watson founded #HillaryMen to provide actionable analysis of the 2016 campaign focusing on the gender barrier in U.S. politics. Peter is a former senior digital adviser to Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Global Initiative. He is a veteran of two presidential campaigns (Kerry '04 and Clinton '08). Tom is an author and Columbia University lecturer who advises companies and non-profits on social activism.