Gee, I can hardly decide what part I like best, but I'm going to have to go with the disgraceful juxtaposition of the blaring headline definitively stating that "Hillary Was in White House on 'Stained Blue Dress' Day" and the muted subhead meekly noting the reviewed schedules "Show Hillary May Have Been in the White House When the Fateful Act Was Committed."
Well done. Truly.
Susie Madrak says, "In all my years in journalism, I've never seen anything quite as disgusting as this," while Brad Friedman notes, "A more shameful display of 'journalism', we don't believe we've ever seen."
Meanwhile, Lambert offers dryly: "Some people are of the opinion that misogyny has been pervasive in this campaign. How could they have gotten such a crazy idea?" Indeed.
UPDATE: I'd like to just quickly point out before my head explodes that "Hillary Clinton spent the night in the White House on the day her husband had oral sex with Monica Lewinsky, and may have actually been in the White House when it happened" serves absolutely no other purpose but to humiliate her.
This is not "news." This is not even in the same fucking galaxy as "news."
This is a hit piece. This is unrelentingly despicable.
And it doesn't matter whether you support Hillary or not; letting the media get away with this tactic against her only legitimizes and tacitly encourages it, which means they'll inevitably use it against everyone.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus