How False Equivalence Ruins Trump-Clinton News Coverage
John Kerr
October 22, 2016 12:21 pm
News outlets covering the presidential election have made the mistake of treating Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as two equally flawed candidates. That false equivalence has made it harder for voters to understand the categorical differences between their options on November 8.
In typical elections, news outlets often treat both major presidential candidates as relatively similar — comparing their flaws, scrutinizing their respective scandals, and framing the election as a choice between two comparable options.
That approach hasn’t been appropriate this election cycle. Clinton is not a flawless candidate — her campaign has been dogged by conspiracies surrounding the Clinton Foundation and her use of a private email server as secretary of state. But she is a relatively conventional one — abiding by both constitutional and political norms.
Trump, on the other hand, represents a dramatic break from mainstream American politics. He threatens the First Amendment, demonizes minority groups, cozies up to white supremacists, championed the birther movement, invites Russian interference in the election, promises to arrest his political opponent, lies constantly, lacks the most basic interest in and knowledge of public policy, says he may not accept the results of the election because he believes it to be “rigged” — the list goes on and on.
These are not equally flawed candidates. But a number of news outlets have treated them as such, devoting similar amounts of attention and ink to Clinton and Trump’s respective controversies.
-snip-
http://www.nationalmemo.com/false-equivalence-ruins-news-coverage/
= new reply since forum marked as read
