I distinctly recall that Hillary was a major player in the Afghanistan debate...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

As the saying goes, "journalism is the first draft of history."

Journalistic books like Woodward's stuff are the second draft. And so on.

The cool thing is that we can see the second draft before the first draft is all the way down the memory hole.

I remember that in contemporaneous accounts the Afghanistan debate was kind of Hillary and Gates versus Biden. There was a newspaper photo of all the players sitting around a table looking grim.

But based on what is being reported from the Woodward book Hillary was not very involved in the real tug-of-war. Her name doesn't even come up in most of the "Woodward says..." articles. (She is an aggressive person. If she held back I am sure it was because she saw no advantage in getting into the fray. And I don't doubt her general opinion was on the more hawkish side.)

So here's the question. Were the early stories that way because we would assume from everything we know about Hillary that she would be all over the thing? That the narrative just felt more right?

To what degree does dead-line journalism seek plausibility in the context of expectations above all else?

[karynnj]

1. I suspect that none of the accounts tell the actual complete story

Hillary Clinton is a not just one of the players in what happens in the White House. She has been a public figure with many who have advocated for - or against - her since 1992. I suspect that this leads to many accounts that over weight her actual involvement. Not out of dishonesty, but simply because a writer might ask more questions on "What was Hillary's view?" or "What did Hillary do?" than they might about say, Jim Jones. I do remember many accounts argued that she sided with Gates and McChrystal. It was never clear if this meant she was an active, independent voice or whether she opted to go with the military.

Even on foreign policy issues, there are periodically articles that have read like puff pieces on her accomplishments as Secretary of State. Not to mention, there were many puff pieces following the NYT's meme that HRC was a quiet, backbencher when she entered the Senate raising to be a leader who developed rapport with people on both sides of the aisle. Yet, there never was an example given of any major legislation which she took the lead role on getting passed - nor, was there an example where she brokered a deal that created a compromise - even one that failed.

Now, it is very clear that HRC is articulate, hard working, and very smart. She also has a large group of media pundits who have been on her side for decades, who looked forward to her becoming the first woman President. What I wonder is whether the articles that push her achievements beyond what they are actually are counterproductive to her at this point. They create a bar where they expect her to preform that is not given for others.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

2. All true, and it goes the other way also...

Since the presentation at the time was that she was kind of the deciding weight on the hawkish side it wasn't necessarily flattering. But again, playing to a developed expectation. (The expectation that Hillary would push Obama to the right, though they're really quite similar.)

Your comments about how journalists would effectively over-play her role simply by wanting to know what it was is excellent. Since she's "the story" even if she had no involvement at all that would have been read as meaningful somehow.

[karynnj]

3. Exactly, where there is assumed to be influence - if wrong, it is bad

I think at the time it was written, to most of the audiences (notably not the left), it was flattering and counteracted an earlier set of articles suggesting that Obama had cleverly sidelined a potential political opponent (by putting her in a very key cabinet post - yeah, that's the way to sideline someone) and that she had little power.

Thank you for your praise - and even more, your understanding. I think this phenomena exists whether HRC wants it - or in fact, ever wanted it.