As we note the corporate media hypocrisy about the Reade allegations against Biden, it is time to get specific. We already know how "TimesUp" ignored Reade. We already know how Elizabeth Warren, who made gender so front and center as her campaign sputtered, has been silent. But let's start looking at the feminist columnists who would have been heralding Reade as the great truth teller if this was an allegation made against Bernie (never mind, Trump, as Trump already has, what, sixteen of these types of allegations?).
It's been a good week of silence for Salon feminist beat writer, Amanda Marcotte, and it is clear Reade has been trying to get this more known since at least January 2020. I am open to others adding to the others who remain silent, say over at The Nation for instance (cough, cough, Joan Walsh and Katha Pollitt)? And these women write in progressive and "woke" journals. One can check their regional and local press for those who are on the so-called "feminist" beat, and see if there is anything about Reade's allegations against Biden.
As people know, I have said there are reasons to doubt the accuracy of Ms. Reade's sexual assault claim, but that doesn't stop the corporate media feminist writer factory from grinding their wheels and saying things like "Believe women!" when they want to hurt a man who they don't like. I have always supported the sentiment behind the phrase, and I generally believe women in these matters. However, the silence regarding Reade's allegations against Biden is deafening at this point. Whatever they say now is likely to be a nuanced dodge most wouldn't give to Al Franken.
UPDATE March 31, 2020: Amanda Marcotte is on the job! Here is her article in Salon today. Notice the nuance throughout Marcotte's article, which I predicted above. Note, too, how Marcotte first, and mainly, focuses on the discussions online by individuals and the few media reports outside of mainstream corporate television and radio, instead of highlighting corporate broadcast media silence--including not a single question asked of Biden on the topic at CNN's Town Hall a few days ago. Marcotte's article also obscures how Time's Up expressly told Reade they could not assist Reade because of electoral issues, when there is more to the story than Marcotte reports, as lawyer and former MSNBC commentator, Dan Abrams, detailed here. Abrams shows, through a timeline of events, how Times Up was initially supportive, but, how Anita Dunn, active with both the Biden campaign and Times Up's organization, could have easily played a role in the organization's later refusal to help Reade. And really, if Times Up does public relations, it should make absolutely no difference if Biden is an active candidate. By supporting Reade, it would be acting consistently with its non-profit charter, to help women anywhere and everywhere, particularly against powerfully situated men. Grimm's reporting on Times Up refusal makes a similar point that the Times Up reasoning is not anywhere as reasonable as Marcotte believes. Worse for Marcotte, Marcotte completely ignores what Ryan Grimm reported in his story, which is how Reade had gone to Senators Warren and Harris months ago, and how the two female senators' offices spurned her. I can only imagine what Marcotte would have said if male senators, running or having campaigned for president, spurned Reade, had the allegation been against Bernie Sanders, not Biden.*
Notice, too, Marcotte's phrasing throughout. When first mentioning Ryan Grimm, the reporter from The Intercept who essentially broke the Reade-Biden story, Marcotte does more than insinuate Grimm writes for a highly biased publication, The Intercept, stating The Intercept is "strongly supportive of Bernie Sanders and critical of Biden." It is only later in her piece, in a parenthesis (!), that Marcotte lets readers know it was Grimm, at the very aforementioned and supposedly biased online magazine, The Intercept, who broke the story of the letter Dr. Ford wrote to Senator Feinstein about Kavanaugh's sexual assault against her. Marcotte is a clever writer who knows how to obscure inconvenient facts, and lead her readers into thinking Reade's allegation against Biden must somehow be treated differently than the allegations against Kavanaugh when first raised.
From reading Marcotte over the years, today's op-ed may be the first time Marcotte has, with any true detail, acknowledged a campaign besides Bernie's--in this case, Biden's--has some flamer-jerk supporters who harass people on the Internet. Marcotte could have easily learned this fact before, but she obviously has had no interest in fairness regarding Bernie Sanders fans on the Internet. Until now, as she tries to strike the moderating pose.
After reading Marcotte's op-ed, I decided to go back into Marcotte's archives at Salon magazine's website to see what she first said about Dr. Ford's allegations against Kavanaugh. I found what I believe is Marcotte's first discussion regarding the topic. There is no showing Marcotte was aware of any vetting of Dr. Ford's claims, as Marcotte did not even appear to know Dr. Ford's name at the time she wrote her article. However, with the allegation against Kavanaugh, Marcotte was all-in to fully and publicly investigate the still anonymous allegations--meaning, with no additional private vetting. At that point, Marcotte had already published various opinion articles highlighting the horrible record Kavanaugh had on abortion and a host of other issues likely to be heard at the Supreme Court (For the record, I was completely opposed to Kavanaugh, too. See here, before Dr. Ford's allegations, and here, after the allegations for my own blog posts). What is telling to me, in comparing Marcotte's first reaction to Dr. Ford's allegations, which were, again, still anonymous at the time she wrote, and Reade's allegations against Biden now, is how quick Marcotte was to rip Republicans for not wanting to air the anonymous accusations, while we now find her defending, however obliquely, corporate broadcast media's non-interest in Reade's allegations, and Marcotte's willingness to whitewash Time's Up's failure to assist Reade.
Overall, Marcotte's first formal foray (I have not delved much into her Twitter account) into this allegation against Biden is another exhibit for why I consider Marcotte a hack. I am still waiting to see if the other hack I mentioned, Joan Walsh, is going to opine over at The Nation. So far, there is only continued silence from Walsh.
* I get that Marcotte has written several articles which were against Biden, starting in 2019, at least. However, she has been a noted Bernie hater since the 2015-2016 presidential primary, and we are now at a point where Marcotte, who has shown she despises Bernie more than Biden, despite claiming fealty to some of Bernie's progressive issues, knows which side of the corporate-progressive divide she is ultimately on.
UPDATE April 1, 2020: Krystal Ball thinks Marcotte is full of it, too--and went through Marcotte's Twitter account, showing Marcotte's hack hypocrisy. And here are both Krystal and Saagar on the lack of corporate media coverage.
UPDATE March 31, 2020: Amanda Marcotte is on the job! Here is her article in Salon today. Notice the nuance throughout Marcotte's article, which I predicted above. Note, too, how Marcotte first, and mainly, focuses on the discussions online by individuals and the few media reports outside of mainstream corporate television and radio, instead of highlighting corporate broadcast media silence--including not a single question asked of Biden on the topic at CNN's Town Hall a few days ago. Marcotte's article also obscures how Time's Up expressly told Reade they could not assist Reade because of electoral issues, when there is more to the story than Marcotte reports, as lawyer and former MSNBC commentator, Dan Abrams, detailed here. Abrams shows, through a timeline of events, how Times Up was initially supportive, but, how Anita Dunn, active with both the Biden campaign and Times Up's organization, could have easily played a role in the organization's later refusal to help Reade. And really, if Times Up does public relations, it should make absolutely no difference if Biden is an active candidate. By supporting Reade, it would be acting consistently with its non-profit charter, to help women anywhere and everywhere, particularly against powerfully situated men. Grimm's reporting on Times Up refusal makes a similar point that the Times Up reasoning is not anywhere as reasonable as Marcotte believes. Worse for Marcotte, Marcotte completely ignores what Ryan Grimm reported in his story, which is how Reade had gone to Senators Warren and Harris months ago, and how the two female senators' offices spurned her. I can only imagine what Marcotte would have said if male senators, running or having campaigned for president, spurned Reade, had the allegation been against Bernie Sanders, not Biden.*
Notice, too, Marcotte's phrasing throughout. When first mentioning Ryan Grimm, the reporter from The Intercept who essentially broke the Reade-Biden story, Marcotte does more than insinuate Grimm writes for a highly biased publication, The Intercept, stating The Intercept is "strongly supportive of Bernie Sanders and critical of Biden." It is only later in her piece, in a parenthesis (!), that Marcotte lets readers know it was Grimm, at the very aforementioned and supposedly biased online magazine, The Intercept, who broke the story of the letter Dr. Ford wrote to Senator Feinstein about Kavanaugh's sexual assault against her. Marcotte is a clever writer who knows how to obscure inconvenient facts, and lead her readers into thinking Reade's allegation against Biden must somehow be treated differently than the allegations against Kavanaugh when first raised.
From reading Marcotte over the years, today's op-ed may be the first time Marcotte has, with any true detail, acknowledged a campaign besides Bernie's--in this case, Biden's--has some flamer-jerk supporters who harass people on the Internet. Marcotte could have easily learned this fact before, but she obviously has had no interest in fairness regarding Bernie Sanders fans on the Internet. Until now, as she tries to strike the moderating pose.
After reading Marcotte's op-ed, I decided to go back into Marcotte's archives at Salon magazine's website to see what she first said about Dr. Ford's allegations against Kavanaugh. I found what I believe is Marcotte's first discussion regarding the topic. There is no showing Marcotte was aware of any vetting of Dr. Ford's claims, as Marcotte did not even appear to know Dr. Ford's name at the time she wrote her article. However, with the allegation against Kavanaugh, Marcotte was all-in to fully and publicly investigate the still anonymous allegations--meaning, with no additional private vetting. At that point, Marcotte had already published various opinion articles highlighting the horrible record Kavanaugh had on abortion and a host of other issues likely to be heard at the Supreme Court (For the record, I was completely opposed to Kavanaugh, too. See here, before Dr. Ford's allegations, and here, after the allegations for my own blog posts). What is telling to me, in comparing Marcotte's first reaction to Dr. Ford's allegations, which were, again, still anonymous at the time she wrote, and Reade's allegations against Biden now, is how quick Marcotte was to rip Republicans for not wanting to air the anonymous accusations, while we now find her defending, however obliquely, corporate broadcast media's non-interest in Reade's allegations, and Marcotte's willingness to whitewash Time's Up's failure to assist Reade.
Overall, Marcotte's first formal foray (I have not delved much into her Twitter account) into this allegation against Biden is another exhibit for why I consider Marcotte a hack. I am still waiting to see if the other hack I mentioned, Joan Walsh, is going to opine over at The Nation. So far, there is only continued silence from Walsh.
* I get that Marcotte has written several articles which were against Biden, starting in 2019, at least. However, she has been a noted Bernie hater since the 2015-2016 presidential primary, and we are now at a point where Marcotte, who has shown she despises Bernie more than Biden, despite claiming fealty to some of Bernie's progressive issues, knows which side of the corporate-progressive divide she is ultimately on.
UPDATE April 1, 2020: Krystal Ball thinks Marcotte is full of it, too--and went through Marcotte's Twitter account, showing Marcotte's hack hypocrisy. And here are both Krystal and Saagar on the lack of corporate media coverage.
