Are you curious why, according to FiveThirtyEight, the Clinton campaign has endured roughly three months of relentlessly hostile news coverage? Well, a major contributing factor is that new outlets have shown an alarming predilection for regurgitating misleading anti-Clinton leaks that have come from right-wing organizations. Once these leaks are proven wrong, the outlets have been slow to correct their original stories, or sometimes even flat-out refused to do so.
There are plenty of radical sources who are willing to peddle misinformation to the media. The problem begins when those lies make it into print unquestioned—as they have time and time again. Consider the most recent example below, where an utter falsehood about Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin ran as a standalone story in both the New York Times and Politico.
THE LIFE CYCLE OF A LIE:
Hillary Clinton Signed Job Change for Huma Abedin (she didn’t)
FIRST, THE MEDIA PRINTS A FACT THAT SOUNDS LIKE A RIGHT-WING LIE:
NYT: “Hillary Clinton Personally Signed Off on Job Change for Huma Abedin.” “Hillary Rodham Clinton was directly involved in arranging a new government position for a top aide that allowed the aide to begin working for a private consulting firm while remaining at the State Department, according to documents released on Thursday. The documents, released by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, show that Mrs. Clinton personally signed forms establishing a new title and position for the aide, Huma Abedin, in March 2012. The forms were part of a broader process in which Ms. Abedin, then Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, was transitioning to a role as a “special government employee,” which allowed her to collect salaries from the State Department, the Clinton Foundation and the private firm, Teneo, which was co-founded by a former aide to President Clinton.” [“Hillary Clinton Personally Signed Off on Job Change for Huma Abedin,” NYT, 9/24/15] (emphasis added)
AND MAKES A BIG SHOW OF “CATCHING” A “FALSEHOOD”:
Hillary Clinton has said she “was not directly involved” with Abedin’s employment arrangement. “Clinton, in an interview with MSNBC on Sept. 4, said she ‘was not directly involved’ with Abedin’s job arrangement. ‘Do you think [Donald Trump] had a point in raising the question of whether it was appropriate for her to be taking a State Department salary and also be paid by an outside company closely associated with your husband, by you?’ asked reporter Andrea Mitchell. ‘Well, I was not directly involved in that, but everything that she did was approved under the rules as they existed by the State Department,’ Clinton said.” [Politico, 9/24/15]
THEN, THE ACTUAL FACTS COME OUT:
Turns out, Cheryl Mills, not Hillary Clinton, signed paperwork approving Huma Abedin’s employment arrangement. “Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff —and not Clinton herself — signed a State Department form that helped another Clinton aide change to a job status that allowed broader private-sector employment, a Clinton campaign official said late Saturday. Although the campaign will not say whether it has the actual document in hand, a Clinton camp assertion that Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills signed paperwork key to Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s 2012 change from a full-time role to a ‘special government employee’ could clarify why the Democratic presidential candidate and former secretary of state told an interviewer earlier this month that she was ‘not directly involved’ in converting Abedin’s role to a senior adviser and expert.” [Politico, 9/27/15]
The Clinton Campaign noted that the document was only approval of the title change related to Abedin’s transition. “The Clinton Campaign argued Thursday that the document wasn’t the actual approval of the SGE status but only approved the title change that came with Abedin’s transition. The document states that the position was ‘new’ and an SGE job: ‘The incumbent serves as a Senior Adviser, Expert-Special Government Employee.’ Huma Abedin’s lawyers have maintained that she did nothing wrong, noting that government workers have moved to SGE status before.” [Politico, 9/24/15]
FINALLY, THE LONG WAIT FOR A CORRECTION:
| The New York Times blew it… |  |
| And where is Politico? |  |