Much as I love a good political scandal, the story making the rounds today, allegations that Sen. John McCain’s aides thought he was having an affair with a lobbyist during the 2000 campaign, says more about the newspaper breaking the story than it does about the senator.
The story published by the New York Times brings up the affair allegations and rehashes well-known incidents from McCain’s past, including his entanglement in the Keating savings and loan scandal two decades ago. The story is rife with innuendo and unnamed sources as it discusses issues such as McCain’s use of lobbyists in his campaign (something every candidate does).
What the New York Times doesn’t tell you, though, is that journalists across the country have known for months that the Times reporters were working on the story and that Sen. McCain himself had been told about it in December, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The Drudge Report late last year reported that Times editor Bill Keller had met with McCain to discuss the story. McCain denied the Times’ allegations at that time.
But the story sat for two months.
On Jan. 25, the New York Times endorsed (back-handedly) McCain for the Republican nominee.
Only now, as McCain nears formally locking up the nomination and the Democrats appear closer to picking their candidate, does the New York Times spring the story.
It’s a textbook example of how the media can manipulate politics and people: Sit on a potentially damaging story about a candidate while promoting that very same candidate, then at the opportune moment go to print and give the opposing party (the one your editors really support) a big boost.
And newspaper editors dare to wonder why circulation is dropping.
Subscribe to the RSS feed
