CHARLES PIERCE: NYT tried to make the Weiner story a Clinton story, and the result is embarrassing

[kpete]

I thought that Dowd's effort over the weekend—which can be fairly summarized as "The Republican presidential campaign is an obvious freak show but Hillary Rodham Clinton Still Has Cooties"—might have been the height of the form. However, I had not reckoned with the paper's coverage of the unfortunate episode currently ongoing between Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner. You want to see some tasty nothingburger, check out this passage.

From the Times:

Now, Mr. Weiner's tawdry activities may have claimed his marriage—Ms. Abedin told him that she wanted to separate—and have cast another shadow on the adviser and confidante who has been by Mrs. Clinton's side for the past two decades. Ms. Abedin was already a major figure this summer in controversies over Mrs. Clinton's handling of classified information as secretary of state and over ties between the Clinton family foundation and Mrs. Clinton's State Department.

This is horrible. This is ghastly. This is cheap shot by deliberate imprecision. This is the kind of thing that would get thrown back in the face of rookie reporters in Seagoville, Texas.

What "shadow," precisely, is it that her husband's misbehavior is casting over Ms. Abedin? Other than the fact that summoning up this "shadow" is a way to get the words "classified information" into a story about the sad public dissolution of a marriage, as well as a way to wedge in a reference to the Clinton Foundation. This is one large storage space of a "shadow." I mean it. Who in the unholy fck thinks like this?




MORE:
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a48173/new-york-times-clinton-coverage/
These are good too:
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/08/anthony-weiner-and-huma-abedins-divorce-isnt-political.html?mid=twitter_cut
https://www.thenation.com/article/the-media-is-doing-an-abysmal-job-in-covering-donald-trumps-racism/

[SunSeeker]

1. Just more shameless, substance-free, anti-Hillary click bait by the NYT.

[NastyRiffraff]

2. So, let me get this straight

HE acts like a scumbag, repeatedly, and the "shadow" is cast over HER? Another shadow, of course!

Typical condescending, misogynist bullshit.

[riversedge]

5. you got it

[Native]

3. K&R

[mcar]

4. The Clinton Rules

The NYT will never stop following them. This is journalistic malpractice.