You beat Heather Cox Richardson to it on framing. She wrote last night:
This story is about the stealing of our records and the endangerment of our national security—and the heroism of archivists—but it is also a story about the media. The defining narrative of the 2016 election was about Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails, allegedly mishandled. Again and again, the email story was front-page news. A 2017 study in the Columbia Journalism Review by Duncan J. Watts and David M. Rothschild found that the New York Times in six days published as many cover stories about Clinton’s emails as they did about “all the policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election.” The network news gave more time to Clinton’s emails than to all policy issues combined.
Today, Matthew Gertz of Media Matters for America noted that the Trump story should mean that finally “political journalists should stop pretending to believe Republicans when they pretend to be outraged about purportedly illegal or unethical behavior by Democrats.” He compiled a long list of all the Fox News Channel stories about Clinton’s emails and said, “Based on the 2015–16 baseline, Trump flagrantly violating the Presidential Records Act should be a massive story.” Aaron Rupar, author of the newsletter Public Notice, tweeted the obvious: “If two prominent reporters broke news that Joe Biden was flushing documents down White House toilets, [Fox News Channel personality Sean] Hannity would anchor special Fox News coverage that would last through 2024. Trump flushing documents down WH toilets has been mentioned twice on Fox News today, once in passing.”
Thanks for this update to the underlying question - how events and new information are contextualized is as important as that which is being added to the Big Picture - and thank you all the more for the link to Timothy Noah's powerful depiction of DC and the "Asknots" who literally as well as figuratively keep the lights on. I was one of them during the late 70's and early 80's even if I lived far from Washington, and I knew many "lifers" whom I respected immensely for their commitment and sacrifices. I think it is all the more impressive to consider how that expanded network of dedicated public servants enabled an aggregate prosperity that has unfortunately been so unequally accessible to large swaths of the general public (that was a product of ideological choices rather than economic necessity).
Interesting, thought provoking posts on framing that also got me finally to start paying attention to the wonderful Webb telescope, and to read Timothy Noah's illuminating Asknots piece.
I began subscribing to 'Breaking the News' recently. It's a valuable, perhaps unequaled, tool for understanding journalism, and I love it. Thank you, Mr. Fallows, for creating it.
When I saw the Trump story about classified document being among those taken illegally, I remembered that a national security or foreign policy official from a Democratic administration and taken a small number of documents (I think, he claimed, to refresh his memory for a book), but I couldn't remember the details. Thanks for noting the highlights here.
The mention of Mark Leibovich’s "This Town" recalled his discussion of a young African-American aide to Terry McAuliffe, whom Leibovich dismissed as a political prop. Said prop, Levar Stoney, is now mayor of Richmond and tearing down Confederate statues. Not the greatest of Leibovich's sins, but a memorable one.
Thanks for drawing my attention to this. I'm one of those people who currently reads newspapers online, and I wasn't aware of this.
The NYT has definitely deteriorated since the end of the last century. My father, who read it religiously, scoured it, would be appalled.
I pay particular attention to immigration. I suspect that if the mainstream media had done a decent job reporting on it, and the Democratic party had altered their policies based on good reporting, TFG never would have been elected, as immigration was his signature issue when he first ran. I wrote regularly to at least 4 NYT ombuds over the years. Two of them ultimately told me they were thinking of writing about my complaints. Both of them were gone from the NYT within around six weeks of my hearing from them. The NYT's bias was apparently policy coming down from Sulzberger Jr. Their coverage was much better before he took over.
You beat Heather Cox Richardson to it on framing. She wrote last night:
This story is about the stealing of our records and the endangerment of our national security—and the heroism of archivists—but it is also a story about the media. The defining narrative of the 2016 election was about Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails, allegedly mishandled. Again and again, the email story was front-page news. A 2017 study in the Columbia Journalism Review by Duncan J. Watts and David M. Rothschild found that the New York Times in six days published as many cover stories about Clinton’s emails as they did about “all the policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election.” The network news gave more time to Clinton’s emails than to all policy issues combined.
Today, Matthew Gertz of Media Matters for America noted that the Trump story should mean that finally “political journalists should stop pretending to believe Republicans when they pretend to be outraged about purportedly illegal or unethical behavior by Democrats.” He compiled a long list of all the Fox News Channel stories about Clinton’s emails and said, “Based on the 2015–16 baseline, Trump flagrantly violating the Presidential Records Act should be a massive story.” Aaron Rupar, author of the newsletter Public Notice, tweeted the obvious: “If two prominent reporters broke news that Joe Biden was flushing documents down White House toilets, [Fox News Channel personality Sean] Hannity would anchor special Fox News coverage that would last through 2024. Trump flushing documents down WH toilets has been mentioned twice on Fox News today, once in passing.”
Thanks for this update to the underlying question - how events and new information are contextualized is as important as that which is being added to the Big Picture - and thank you all the more for the link to Timothy Noah's powerful depiction of DC and the "Asknots" who literally as well as figuratively keep the lights on. I was one of them during the late 70's and early 80's even if I lived far from Washington, and I knew many "lifers" whom I respected immensely for their commitment and sacrifices. I think it is all the more impressive to consider how that expanded network of dedicated public servants enabled an aggregate prosperity that has unfortunately been so unequally accessible to large swaths of the general public (that was a product of ideological choices rather than economic necessity).
Interesting, thought provoking posts on framing that also got me finally to start paying attention to the wonderful Webb telescope, and to read Timothy Noah's illuminating Asknots piece.
I began subscribing to 'Breaking the News' recently. It's a valuable, perhaps unequaled, tool for understanding journalism, and I love it. Thank you, Mr. Fallows, for creating it.
When I saw the Trump story about classified document being among those taken illegally, I remembered that a national security or foreign policy official from a Democratic administration and taken a small number of documents (I think, he claimed, to refresh his memory for a book), but I couldn't remember the details. Thanks for noting the highlights here.
beautiful writing, thank you!
The Times is wearing -- and so indispensable.
The mention of Mark Leibovich’s "This Town" recalled his discussion of a young African-American aide to Terry McAuliffe, whom Leibovich dismissed as a political prop. Said prop, Levar Stoney, is now mayor of Richmond and tearing down Confederate statues. Not the greatest of Leibovich's sins, but a memorable one.
Thanks for drawing my attention to this. I'm one of those people who currently reads newspapers online, and I wasn't aware of this.
The NYT has definitely deteriorated since the end of the last century. My father, who read it religiously, scoured it, would be appalled.
I pay particular attention to immigration. I suspect that if the mainstream media had done a decent job reporting on it, and the Democratic party had altered their policies based on good reporting, TFG never would have been elected, as immigration was his signature issue when he first ran. I wrote regularly to at least 4 NYT ombuds over the years. Two of them ultimately told me they were thinking of writing about my complaints. Both of them were gone from the NYT within around six weeks of my hearing from them. The NYT's bias was apparently policy coming down from Sulzberger Jr. Their coverage was much better before he took over.
Agree as does Robert Reich, this is an insightful piece he wrote for the Guardian, with the possible exception of the final line: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/09/whats-really-wrong-mainstream-media