NYT Public Editor: Dowd "Went Over the Top" in Clinton Coverage

In an article on media sexism in the Democratic primary, NYT Public Editor Clark Hoyt singles out Maureen Dowd's columns as deserving more scrutiny:

Peggy Aulisio of South Dartmouth, Mass., said, "A real review of your own stories and columns is warranted." I think so too. And I think a fair reading suggests that The Times did a reasonably good job in its news articles. But Dowd's columns about Clinton's campaign were so loaded with language painting her as a 50-foot woman with a suffocating embrace, a conniving film noir dame and a victim dependent on her husband that they could easily have been listed in that Times article on sexism, right along with the comments of Chris Matthews, Mike Barnicle, Tucker Carlson or, for that matter, Kristol.

While arguing that many complaints about Times' coverage "reflect a shoot-the-messenger anger," Hoyt concludes that complaints about Dowd in particular were justified: "She, I think, by assailing Clinton in gender-heavy terms in column after column, went over the top this election season."

Read more about anti-Clinton sexism in the media here.

Comments

[Rendon76]

Burn her at the steak! Stone her!

[toomuchtolose]

Rendon76

No, No. Don't burn or stone her. Look at her face. A man that age would be looking handsome
and distinguished. Unfortunately, the girlish hair doesn't hide all those lines and wrinkles. It actually frames them. Well, that's just the way it is, isn't it. Women lose their good looks just when men are looking their best. One must suppose the rest of her is sagging too. Sad. Put her in a back room and let her write her columns - she's not front office anymore.

[CitizenKane16]

Are you living in some alternate universe??? With the male middle age crisis, losing your hair, getting large around the middle going on, tell me again how a man that age would be looking handsome. Just because Maureen isn't lookin' too good, don't assume all women her age aren't.

[Nopes]

The paranoia of Clinton supporters is pathetic. Dowd, a woman, was sexist against a woman?
That's simply ridiculous.
Dowd attacked Clinton because she was a woman? No. You have to be really a bold faced liar to claim that.

[spaceman3838]

dowd is just a jerk, its really very simple. she dares call someone narcissistic. my god she is the most narcissistic person in the world

[Housewife]

Maureen Dowd is an equal opportunity offender. No one is safe from her razor sharp writing. Sounds like someones is being a little too sensitive.

[StephenS]

Maureen Dowd was not anything like an equal opportunity offender of Clinton and Obama in the Democratic primary/caucus season. 64% of her columns had "gender-laden" (not sure who defines that) attacks on Clinton.

From the article: "But the relentless nature of her gender-laden assault on Clinton in 28 of 44 columns since Jan. 1 left many readers with the strong feeling that an impermissible line had been crossed, even though, as Dowd noted, she is a columnist who is paid not to be objective.""

[scorbs]

I don't think so. Her nasty columns went on week after week. Someone did an analysis of a column in which Dowd spoke of both candidates:

Here are the words she uses in association with Senator Clinton: “desperate,” “primal scream,” “clanging,” “churlish,” “discombobulated,” “gloomy,” “flipping,” “begrudging,” “whining,” “experience,” “pea green with envy,” “Sybil,” “cascading,” “dizzying,” “unsettling,” “struggling,” “tartly,” “peevishly,” “pointlessly,” “sarcasm.”

And here are the words she uses for Senator Obama: “golden child,” “sunny,” “consistency,” “bedazzling,” “confidence,” “excitement,” “exceptionally easy in his skin.”

Again she was particularly belittling of Clinton and I frankly will never read her again because of such a nasty view of a public servant, who has worked for the community.

[tcolgan001]

You'll find more emotion about Dowd's writing which is critical of Clinton then what she wrote that was critical of Bush and the whole run-up to the war...

... or her criticisms of Judith Miller acting as a shill for the neocons.

Get rid of Maureen and you loose the voice of reason in the sea of madmen.

But then maybe people just want more of what Clinton represents - standard power politics. No we never forgave Hillary for her vote in favor of the war. Why should we?

[hopefull2008]

Just keep following the money ... nobody wants this Clinton Obama thing to end. I have no doubt that it is much better for ratings than McCain Obama.

[AJBF]

Dowd has been plenty tough on Obama also. She pointed out truths about Hillary that would have elicited outrage had they been exposed by a man. I don't always like how Dowd wastes her time and energies on superficial subjects at a time when our country is in such disarray, but I appreciate her tough candor and incisive analysis.

[Wistful]

No, Clark Hoyt is as wrong as he can be! Maureen Dowd was not over-the-top in depicting The Clinton's campaign conduct., which was arrogant, offensive, aggressive and a lot more than a little racist and demeaning towards Sen Obama.
Maureen Dowd said for me what I am not quite competent enough to say for myself, yes, she spoke for me!
And I thank god everday that the Clinton juggernaut did not win the nomination.
If they, Bill and Hillary were insufferable on the campaign trail, just think how they would be now if she had won.
Bill Clinton SHOULD be ashamed for his dishonest, betraying the nation and his wife conduct and he's not! Which makes him an immoral narcissist and Hillary his clapping, pointing, always pointing at someone, enabler.
And never forget, NO ONE forced them to run for their various political offices, I owe them no respect if I don't choose to bestow it.
I'll never forget Bill's in-your-face photo on the cover of a men's magazine before the convention in 2000 and that looong walk down the hall of the convention center with that sneer/smirk on his face.

All things considered, they have been very fortunate people, indeed.

[rationalthought1]

In case you weren't aware of it, Maureen Dowd is a satrist who always incorporates the psycho/sexual battle of our hypocritical politics. Of course, she's going to make reference to Hillary's gender - just as she will Barack's race. For Dowd, Bill Clinton is like a giant pinata on Christmas. She turned Bush into an absurd rag doll of conflicts and insecuritites. What she writes is good, clean, nasty fun. People need to have their holier-than-thou pretensions burst.

[AdamNauseam]

Thank you. What a relief to read a response from a rational, thinking person! People are taking Maureen Dowd's columns out of context.

[stephenswain]

I am a huge fan of Maureen Dowd's snarky sensibilities. That's her job. She does it well. I hope she keeps it up. Good on her!

[Mamie527]

This feminist loved every word Maureen Dowd said about Mrs. Clinton. She was right on target.

[JakeEasy]

So you are full of just as much self-loathing as MODO? You need to get to a good shrink and work out your issues with strong women.

[joefazio]

There remains no doubt that Dowd , used her words like
a surgeons scalpel to carve up Hillary during this past campaign.

Dowd is probably one of the best writers in the business. When people
like her use their talent and station in life, to wrongly write in a manner
that is not objective, it does us all a real disservice.

Ms. Dowd, you truly disappointed my on this one.

[dac253]

Oh whaaaa!

Don't spill your 140 degree half caff no whip soy latte while you cry.

Maureen calls 'em like she sees 'em and you and your army of pansies isn't going to change that with some mawkish blog post.

[breakingthrough]

Amen to that!

For God's sake, It's all about satire! the lubrication that keeps our brains churning.

What is it with you people who can't find humor where it lies?

Look at what she calls Barack: is "O'Bambi" whining about it?

[tess08]

YAY, you go Maureen! Compared to many NYT editors who "spun" the pro-Clinton text and ignored their revolting smears, you reported fairly and honestly.

[amantell]

I've been a reader of Dowd's for over a decade. My impression is that she frequently criticized Clinton because of her own doubts about Clinton's honesty. Dowd often ridiculed Clinton through humor about gender roles because that's the former's abiding interest above all other things, including politics. While Dowd's ad hominem are remarks are sometimes too insouciant--so much so that they hide her demand for integrity by the politicians she opines about--they are also often valid.
I'm sad to say that the reason Dowd has exposed herself up to Hoyt's criticism is because she no longer approaches her job with the same zest she did in the late nineties. Her column's insightfulness has become noticably diminished over the past few years, so much so that she seems to phone it in for some of her articles. The slide was slow at first, then became blatant during the time she was promoting her book "Are Men Necessary?"
I continue to be a fan of Dowd's, but it seems to me that she needs some kind of replenishment. Otherwise, she she move away from her current column with Times and find something else that engages her more. If she doesn't, she'll open herself up to more of the kind of criticism she's received from her own paper's public editor.

[theresedefarge]

I put Maureen Dowd in the same category as Ann Coulter. They represent, in my perception anyway, two sides of the same hateful, bitter coin.

[nyboomer]

Could you be any more wrong?

[Deaninphilly]

No, I think he/she about nailed it. Only far lefties like her just like far righties like Coulter. The rest of us from time to time find some humor, but overall discount what they have to say due to the slant.

[thatvisionthing]

Maureen Dowd is funny, Ann Coulter isn't. Heads and asses, that coin?

[rabrophy]

Castigating Dowd, while overlooking the sociopahtic rants of Bill Kristol is an example of rank sexism

[sueno]

I'm a fan of Maureen Dowd, she is a tough cookie and she's hard on everyone she covers.
I think that Maureen Dowd, surfaced issues that bothered a lot of elites at a time when they
were unable to reply to what she was saying, and those elites, couched everything as "sexist".
HRC has power, has wielded power to her advantage and against others. HRC is also apart of elite society.
Yet when HRC used her power against others (and yes, she offended thousands), it was defined as
part of her appeal and yet when someone like Maureen Dowd, calls her on it, then everything is a foul ball! Also Maureen Dowd exposed a big riff between old school feminists, women of color and younger women, which many writers have yet to touch.
Yes, sexism exists and affects many in the workplace-
but one can't have it both ways, you can't throw daggers and expect someone not to throw them back!

[KPinSEA]

It's a pretty lame op-ed writer who never offends *anyone*, and I certainly understand how Dowd could have offended many in her campaign coverage.

But it's naive to think that her opinion was an isolated one. For a woman to tell Senator Clinton "Not all your mistakes are actually caused by somebody else's sexism, Senator" .... to say "you speak for some women but NOT ME, lady, so careful with that 'women's candidate' banter" ... somebody had to say that and somebody had to publish it, even a paper whose editorial board had endorsed Senator Clinton.

Dowd is no Kristol, mainly because she seems to have at least a minimal concern with relating her statements to factual events in the real world, not psychic updates from the Cloud Cuckoo Land that Kristol's muse lives in.

[Deaninphilly]

Correct, so the next time O is out there saying the American people this and the American people that I'm sure you'll be the first to tell him he doesn't speak for all Americans, correct?

It's a figure of speech, maybe she should learn how Americans speak then before commenting about it.

[eddiemoney13]

She was absolutely awful over the primary season. "No talent hack" is an understatement. NYT should get rid of her and Bill Kristol.

[tess08]

obviously you couldn't recognize talent if it hit you in the face.

[NoScreenNamesLeft]

Maureen Dowd is a no talent hack and puppet of the far left. Her sole reason for being is to attack the Clintons. The columns section of the New York Times is a joke.

[EricSaeger]

HuffPo's gossip about Dowd is almost as high school as Dowd's unending neurotic preenings in public fora. All writers love seeing their names in print, but Dowd is the poster girl for literary narcissism.

Meanwhile, the truly insightful political minds of America -- Moyers, Chalmers Johnson, Chomsky --- go missing in a sea of sniping Dowds, Malkins, and all the others.

[vallon]

If she's such a puppet for the Left, why does Bush 41 consider her a close friend?

[amdan]

So all of your friends agree with you on all or most subjects?

Talk about living in a bubble, how sad for you.