New York Times public editor Margaret Sullivan posted a blog on Wednesday acknowledging those who support Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders are right to be upset over the lack of meaningful coverage on his campaign.
Sullivan cited many reader comments and emails she’s received from supporters who are disheartened over the “tone of the coverage,” which many have complained comes across as “derogatory or dismissive”, and that the coverage Sanders has been getting is more focused on his personality than important issues.
In her blog, Sullivan rattled off the number of times Sanders has been in the Times From the time of announcing his candidacy at the end of April until the end of August, Sanders has been the subject of 59 articles -- of those 59, only 12 have been actual news coverage. Five of these articles have been on the front page since declaring his candidacy.
By contrast, rival Hilary Clinton saw 54 stories in the pages of the Times in August alone.
Sullivan concluded that Sanders hasn’t been ignored by the Times, though it had gotten off to a slow start and has since gained momentum as his following, and poll numbers, continued to grow.
Sullivan argued that the tone and substance of Sanders’s coverage is a measure of his supporters’ activism. They feel Sanders gets mostly “fluff” reporting compared to reporting on the substance of his campaign issues such as income equality. Sullivan gave by example an exchange between left-wing writer Ana Marie Cox and Sanders:
Cox: Do you think it’s fair that Hillary’s hair gets a lot more scrutiny than yours does?
Sanders: Hillary’s hair gets more scrutiny than my hair?
Cox: Yeah.
Sanders: Is that what you’re asking?
Cox: Yeah.
Sanders: O.K., Ana, I don’t mean to be rude here. I am running for president of the United States on serious issues, O.K.? Do you have serious questions?
Sullivan acknowledged that the Times has not ignored Sanders’s campaign but, well:
it also hasn’t always taken it very seriously. The tone of some stories does seem regrettably dismissive, even mocking at times. Some of it is focused on the candidate’s age, appearance and style rather than what he has to say.
