Wednesday, September 14, 2016

The Media's Obsession With Transparency is a Sexist Double Standard

Like this obsession with her alleged lack of transparency. I just don't get it.

1. Compared with previous candidates she's been just as transparent. For example, what she long since released form her doctor is very similar to what Obama and Romney did. So she is not not less transparent than other recent candidates regarding her health history.

Yet we keep here the media declare: Hillary needs to be much more transparent about her health.

2. Ok, now that she had her public stumble it's understandable that she needs to release a little more than what is, again, a perfectly normal amount of transparency regarding a candidate's health.

I agree that after Sunday she needs to release a little more. Whehter she needs as much as John McCain as some in the media claim I'm not at all sure about. But she should do a little more. And she is going to release more to show that what happened Sunday was not related to her 2012 fall.

3. Having said that, the media has been way over the top in their coverage. Now I have to qualify lest the Liz Spayds and Jack Shafers of the world cry out that it's a legitimate story.

But this is a straw man. You can agree a story should be covered and argue:

A. Wether it's volume and ubiquity was in order or not.

B. Wether you agree with the amount of volume an issue or event is covered, you can also argue wether it merited the tone and kind of coverage it received.

Both A and B are about discretion which Spayd and Shafer pretend the media has none of.

4. Regarding Hillary, the media has chosen to give the huge coverage of her stumble in terms of the idea that she lacks transparency in general and about her health specifically. It all contributes we here to the fact that Hillary Clinton is 'untrusttworthy.'

Even though as we saw in 1 she has released just as much information as previous candidates and will release more now.

5. But what really rankles is how egregiously lacking in the most basic transparency Donald Trump has been. Yet the media hasn't seemed very concerned about this fact. While hypersensitive to any real or imagined case of less than absolute transparency with Hillary, the media doesn't seem perturbed about either how dishonest 'Mr. Trump' is or how completely an unknown quantity he really is.

We have never known less about a major nominee, at least in modern times, than Donald Trump.

Yet the media is shocked about her utter lack of transparency despite her releasing 40 years of tax returns.

They don't worry that Mr. Trump doesn't want to release his tax returns or medical records. Hey, Mr. Trump deserves his privacy.

Why would liberals expect the media to actually vet Trump before he's the next President and there's a constitutional crisis?

But in truth so much of this obsession with Hillary's alleged lack of transparency despite the evidence is based completely on gender.

"But fact remains that press keeps asking: What is she hiding? Will it ask Trump what he is hiding too?"

"Too much of the mistrust in Hillary Clinton is plain sexism."

"The condescending way an infection of the lungs in the middle of an exhaustive, competitive campaign is being portrayed is the last straw for me. Trump withholds his tax returns with no repercussions. She’s castigated at every turn as secretive for not revealing the pneumonia diagnosis right away. We’re talking a couple of days."

“Donald Trump Seizes Hillary Clinton’s Absence to Press His Case,” reads the headline in The New York Times.

"Read that: Woman misses work, she’s weak!"

"CNN’s Christiane Amanpour reported a strong historic piece about all the men who’ve been president while suffering from life-threatening illnesses in office — pointing out that the male press covering them kept their bad health a secret — and the headline that trends is: “Can’t a girl have a sick day or two?”

Read more here:

Beltway insiders do a lot of mocking liberal critiques of asymmetry as just about ideological bias.

"One way to avoid answering the question is to label such questions as ideological, as here."

But with the respective transparency of the two candidates it's impossible to deny-whatever you want to believe the motivation is-that she is graded by a much tougher, practically impossible standard of transparency, while 'Mr. Trump' is graded by a much gentler standard. 

Nothing is a clearer case of asymmetry than the respective standards the two candidates get on transparency.
He can tell us what he thinks is important while still respecting his privacy.

No comments:

Post a Comment