Quote (Goomshill @ Apr 30 2020 09:05pm)
One of the main takeaways the modern feminist movement has from the Clinton era is how 'shamefully' the media treated Juanita Broaddrick. NBC interviewed her but sat on the tape for 35 days until after Clinton was acquitted in his impeachment trial, intentionally spiking the story. Along with all the 'bimbo eruptions', the smears, digging into the women's pasts, the lack of credulity in the coverage, etc. Indeed, it marked one of the big turning points in diverging cable news into the partisan camps where political alignment dictated how they'd spin the stories without any shame.
Tara Reade's story was suppressed for 35 days give or take, and then even once it started making news- only after corroboration and evidence is piled on- the left-wing networks (everything but fox) still won't give her airtime and then in a slap to the face, decide that Biden gets to air his response before Reade even gets to make her accusation on their soapbox. How does it come that a woman who's willing to take for a month gets airtime after a man who refused to talk for a month?
First off, this is happening in the context of a deadly pandemic that has killed 60,000+ Americans so far.
It's been reported on. Outlets like the New York Times chose to do their own digging before running with it. That's a good thing. Would they have afforded the same good practices to Trump? Probably not. Then again, Trump has a history of allegations, and Biden does not.
The Business Insider scoop was 2 days ago. The Larry King call was 6 days ago. We'll hear about it.
Context matters in these cases as well. If the election were in a week I'm sure she would've been interviewed by now. In a similar vein, when multiple accusers come out in a similar time frame, that provides incentive for outlets to cover new allegations without doing the necessary leg work.
This post was edited by IceMage on Apr 30 2020 10:08pm