[Content Note: Misogyny.]
I got an email asking me why I don't "write more bad stories about Hillary Clinton." Not critical stories. Bad stories.
It's interesting how many people seem very angry with me that my coverage of Hillary Clinton is one-sided. These people are clearly not paying attention if they believe I've never made a criticism of Clinton, but, even if they were, they wouldn't be satisfied by thoughtful criticisms and stated disagreements based entirely on reasoned analysis.
What they want is for me to hate her.
The only sufficient proof I can possibly offer to satisfy them is to write "bad stories" about Clinton. Stories that indulge conspiracy and cynical misrepresentation. Stories that are riddled with misogyny, preferably as overt as possible. Stories that satiate their need to hate her.
Stories at all. Tales. Pieces of writing that ignore the facts.
I'm guessing that the many corporate media outlets who routinely deliver precisely these sorts of "stories" about Clinton aren't approached by the same people criticizing their one-sided coverage. Because of course the people who email me aren't seeking fairness. They're seeking the precise opposite. They're seeking as much vitriol delivered by trusted sources as possible.
And when I fail to deliver, they accuse me of bias. As if I haven't made my bias abundantly clear.
Being biased, however, doesn't require an abdication of facts. Every supportive thing I have written about Clinton is supported by facts. The truth is, there is no shortage of good things to say about Clinton—and her supporters. I don't have to invent anything or reshape anything or even sand off any rough edges to write positive things about Clinton.
If it seems like I'm conjuring the things I write from nothing, well, frankly that isn't a commentary on me. That's a commentary on how insistently the corporate media conceals the many good things there are to say about Clinton, that what I write feels jarring or discordant or false.
What bias I have is this: I support Clinton, and I do not support a concerted effort to derail the career and attempt to discredit any woman on the basis of anything but the relevant facts.
There are more than enough people willing to talk shit about Hillary Clinton. There are far fewer people who are willing to talk about her many accomplishments.
I'm just trying to balance the scales.
And I don't feel even the tiniest bit obliged to apologize for that.