The
biggest news to come out of Wednesday night’s candidate forum was not
anything said by either Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton
or Republican nominee Donald Trump.
No, the biggest story of the night was how NBC hot Matt Lauer allegedly
failed at his job as a journalist. Lauer, who has been a journalist
since 1979, who has co-hosted The Today Show since 1997, who was live
during the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, and
who has won numerous Emmy awards for his coverage.
“There
will be many issues to explore at the three presidential debates,” the
board wrote. “For the sake of the nation, the moderators need to be
fully prepared to challenge the candidates, so voters can have a clear
picture of how they will lead.”
Suddenly, Lauer is garbage, no better—in the eyes of the mainstream
media—than some basement-dwelling right-wing blogger.
His sin? He allowed Trump to speak during the candidate forum, and
didn’t press the Republican presidential nominee on his answers to the
liking of the liberal media. This morning, I detailed the extent of the
hate being spewed against Lauer by his colleagues in the mainstream
media.
And it’s not letting up. The New York Times editorial board wrote on
Friday that moderators should do more than ask questions and let
candidates answer—they should engage in rigorous (probably
NYT-approved) fact checking.
And it’s not letting up. The New York Times editorial board wrote on
Friday that moderators should do more than ask questions and let
candidates answer—they should engage in rigorous (probably
NYT-approved) fact checking.
The editorial board breathlessly praised Clinton’s performance, and her
“firm understanding of the complex issues facing the country.” Yet it
derided Lauer for focusing so much attention on her email scandal
(which the NYT broke). The mainstream media wants Clinton’s email story
to go away, clearly.
Also on Friday, The Washington Post editorial board wrote an article
titled: “The Hillary Clinton email story is out of control.” The crux
of their argument is that the email scandal—in which Clinton either
purposefully or incompetently mishandled classified information, making
it likely U.S. secrets were hacked by foreign governments—is much ado
about nothing.
Clearly, the mainstream media is panicking about Clinton’s drop in the
polls. They’re lashing out at each other. The Post is mad at The Times,
and everyone has decided that Lauer is the problem. Lauer’s own
employers are calling his performance a “disaster.”
It seems obvious they’re all just upset that Trump hasn’t said or done
anything to take the heat off of Clinton’s two weeks of bad news
coverage. Previously, whenever bad news broke for Clinton, Trump was
there to say or do something outrageous that would suck up attention
and allow Clinton to skate scrutiny. That has changed since Kellyanne
Conway became campaign manager, Steve Bannon of Breitbart News became
campaign CEO, and Jamestown Associates (full disclosure: a group I am
collaborating with on a documentary) took over communications.
Desperate to hold up their historically terrible candidate (second only
to Trump himself), the media is now using Lauer as a scapegoat and
sending a warning to debate moderators that if they don’t step in and
do everything they can to sink Trump’s candidacy, they will be pariahs
in their profession.
But we saw the disasters that ensue when journalists step in to help a
particular candidate. In 2012, Candy Crowley helped President Obama
during a debate against Mitt Romney. Romney said it took Obama two
weeks to call the Benghazi, Libya attacks an “act of terror.” Obama
said he called them that the next day. Crowley stepped in to say that
Obama was correct—but the moment was debated in the following days.
[FULL]
