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

[BrianBoru3]

I read most of Dowd's columns and found them to be quite good. She is after all an opinion writer. I wonder if it is not sexist for Hoyt to be publicly reprimanding her. When will the Clintons and their supporters stop the group whine? It is more than tiresome.

[Marrob]

That's because you hate HIllary. If she had wrote these same articale about Obama, you would have soiled yourself several times this primary season.

[mengwise36]

You are lucky we are only "whining". If we collectively vote for McCain, where will you be. Don't forget, Obama "won" the nomination the same way Bush won the Presidency in 2004, loosing the popular vote.

The best DNC can hope from me is a no vote. Keep your attitude up and it will be a vote for McCain.

[qwr]

Why don't you do some research? Clinton did not win the popular vote.

[twohearts]

Come on, mengwise36 -
You're not going to vote for the nominee?? Isn't this country and the world important enough for you to stop thinking about this as "I'm right and I'll show you!"

I loved Hillary, too, at first. I still love her - not Bill - but she didn't run her campaign well and completely lost my vote when she started saying good things about McCain - our opponent!

McCain should NOT be the next president. Period.

[Simone]

If you vote for McCain, where will you be?

[newgeneration]

oh please.. stop it with the blackmail .

[phoenics]

Actually, where will YOU be if you vote for McCain?

[OhReallySheSaid]

Hey BrianBoraBoring:

Yes, it is tiresome to hear from the people who voted along with the 51% of democrats who supported HRC.

Yes, it is tiresome to hear from HRC dems who outvoted BHO dems after Super Tues. by over 500,000 votes.

Yes, it is tiresome to hear from HRC dems that while the press was hyping the BHO juggernaut, BHO proceeded to lose Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, then West Virginia by 41, Kentucky by 35, Puerto Rico two to one and South Dakota by 10. That last one your guy was supposed to win.

Maybe it is also tiresome to hear that just yesterday CBS polls shows over 30% of the electorate will be using race as a factor to vote. And the Economist, who never bought into the BHO hype, says that if just 25% of HRC dems swing to McCain in the pivotal states, it's over.

Maybe its you and your hype that we HRC dems should be growing tiresome.

[SRaley]

Do you always go around copying and pasting your monotonous drone?

[longtimewatcher]

Maureen is a caricature portraitist. And we are surprised or upset when she does so?

[thatvisionthing]

We're delighted. She hit the nail on the head so many times. Thanks Maureen!

[bigpond]

Dowd can write whatever she wants.
She is a niche humor writer, very intelligent,
and even though I lock horns with her
Clinton jibes, I would not want her curtailed.

The problem was with the NYT "political" writers.
Nothing but powder-puff pieces on Obama, never
missing a moment to mislead about Clinton.

I assume Soros money is involved in this somehow.

[BillBlue]

Hillary is an very competent politician and a gifted policy wonk. But if just not liking her makes a person sexist, then 70 % of the country is sexist, not just Maureen Dowd.

[pahpah25]

hey.......­DOWD voiced her OPINION...­. which,as everyone knows.....­.....every­one has at least one of........­.altho' i do think MAUREEN may have two.

[Dots]

This was not considered opinion...­this was bashing.

[GerryS]

Dots, thats why it's called commentary. Hil got her digs in too!

[jhamm1]

And all the more reason to appraise her.

[marymansour]

Booo hooo hooo! Will the Clintons please stop whining and stand up to the task of paying their campaign debts. All of these media people just stated it the way they saw it. Crying over spilt milk won't change a thing.

[OhReallySheSaid]

It is tiresome to hear from the people who voted along with the 51% of democrats who supported HRC.

Yes, it is tiresome to hear from HRC dems who outvoted BHO dems after Super Tues. by over 500,000 votes.

Yes, it is tiresome to hear from HRC dems that while the press was hyping the BHO juggernaut, BHO proceeded to lose Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, then West Virginia by 41, Kentucky by 35, Puerto Rico two to one and South Dakota by 10. That last one your guy was supposed to win.

Maybe it is also tiresome to hear that the CBS polls show over 30% of the electorate will be using race as a factor to vote. And that's just the people who are willing to admit it publicly! And the Economist, who never bought into the BHO hype, says that if just 25% of HRC dems swing to McCain in the pivotal states, it's over.

Maybe its us HRC dems that are growing tiresome of the constant bashing. Maybe we should just check out and see how well do when 51% of party says "see ya".

[MrsPeel]

Your repetitive posting is tiresome.

[williamg]

Is Hillary still the victim?

[MrsPeel]

LOL.

[Nyland8]

So basically, this "news" article is about one person's opinions about another person's opinions. ?? !!

It is Rodham herself who played the gender card. It is Rodham who painted herself as the hope, not of America, but of women. It is Rodham herself who tried to capitalize on the fact that she was the wife of an ex-president. It was Rodham herself who leveraged her motherhood as an illustration of her capacity to care about children and healthcare for Americans. It was Rodham who publicly cried to the cameras after she'd lost Iowa and needed to rebound in New Hampshire. (No male candidate would have attempted or hoped to benefit from such a stunt)

In the court of public opinion, the defendant opened the door by defining her own defense. Should it surprise anyone that the prosecutors were allowed that line of questioning - to challenge her chosen defense strategy - when she opened the door herself ?? Remember Kerry's post-speech salute ... "reporting for duty!" That's how he got swift-boated.

If your platform is to run as the standard bearer of being a woman, being a mother and being a wife of an ex-president, then you should be judged on that platform.

I never recall Bill Clinton telling the American public that he should be elected as our leader because he was a good husband and a great father. Perhaps if he had, we wouldn't have elected him.

8

[twohearts]

Very interesting comments, Nyland8!

I've read the NYT every day for ages - Dowd - in general - has gotten meaner over the years, but maybe she's just completely disgusted by all public figures now! But she sliced & diced the Bushes, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc etc etc many, many times. Still does.
I do think her Hillary stuff got a little too mean (I don't want to say catty). Bill is an easy one to attack, of course. I still read her...& wonder what her purposes are. Wondered why the 'public editor' even mentioned it - except they must have been criticised mightily.

Gail Collins is a fabulous, relevant & funny writer! David Brooks could be funny even as he writes his dream-type thoughts of the week (which he always pushes again on Washington Week in Review. Kristol? Well, at least I don't have to see the REALLY nasty right-wing mush - especially their horribly racist rants about M. & B. Obama.

[imsixftsix]

I worship the ground that Maureen Dowd walks on! With an extensive vocabulary that would appear as a foreign language to the almost ex-president, she eviscerates and then proceeds to deli-slice(very thin) the politicial objects of her scorn. I anxiously await her next column, like Kathleen Turner in "Serial Mom" plotting her next kill. Let Marueen be Maureen!!!

[JamesInDenver]

I think Dowd has the Clinton's number. Her editorials were right on target. The Clinton's lost because of who they are. Their surrogates should stop blaming the press, and take a hard look in the mirror.

[leftintheoven]

I have read her column for years now and I think she has gradually become more aggressive and negative with every subject over time. She has now become a flame thrower, a grenade launcher and a gatling gunner from one day to the next.

No offense, Maureen, but you need to stop sounding like a hater and become more in tune with what the public's appetite is. A little less caustic and a bit more tempered would go a long, long way.

[gadfly55]

Is this the nice to be nice school of how to win friends and influence people? Call a spade a spade because the pen is mightier than the sword and the how the mighty have fallen from their pre-eminence, entitlement and elevation to noblesse oblige. Read the Sam Anderson article in New York magazine , "Raise High the Rafters" where he refers to the standard of Presidential speech as suitable for 13year olds and going down. At least Maureen Dowd has an intelligence and insight into human behavior appropriate to the tragic characters parading themselves as leaders. It appears that she took heavy flack from the sisterhood for her commentary on Hillary, but she adquired the respect of readers throughout the world who could see right through the Clinton strategy. Fair play to her, and sharpen your rapiers.

[leftintheoven]

You have made some poor assumptions and conclusions. First, I am not nor have ever been supportive of Hillary Clinton as a presidential nominee. Second, I do not question Maureen Dowd's ability to communicate the English language, nor her intelligence or insight into human behavior. Nothing in my comment indicates that she is incapable of producing high quality material

My point is that there are many ways to make written statements. One way is by means of overly direct and aggressive commentary. Another is to state your position and support it with facts, beliefs, opinions or any/all of them.

Enough said. Have a good day.

[imsixftsix]

I worship the ground that Maureen Dowd walks on! With an extensive vocabulary that would appear as a foreign language to the almost ex-president, she eviscerates and then proceeds to deli-slice(very thin) the politicial objects of her scorn. I anxiously await her next column, like Kathleen Turner in "Serial Mom" plotting her next kill. Let Marueen be Maureen!!!

[Maxiesid]

Wait, I am not understanding something. This public editor for the NY Times thinks that Dowd's OPINION pieces need more scrutiny? Is this the same paper that hired William Kristol and allows him to defecate all over their opinion page with no scrutiny whatsoever????? Does the New York Times have ANY credibility left with anyone other than the GOP propagandadists that they support and serve?
Give me a break.

[xpresv]

Thank you! I mean, William Kristol...­the guy whose only credibility comes from his associations with right-wing insiders and the fact that he is always consistent-in being WRONG!

[JimR]

Exactly.

[chaucerfiend]

I don't think you can possibly separate sexism from MSM's hatred of the Clintons. Demanding that journalists be fired doesn't exactly make you a media darling. I don't doubt that were isolated instances of sexism, but I don't feel bad for her when she fanned the flames of Wound Off 2008.

As I've said before, I refuse to judge America for how they treated Senator Clinton, emphasis on the Clinton.

[Flick08]

Uh Oh, watch out Maureen, you're about to get the Angry White Woman treatment. Seriously, she was often biased and often funny. But she took Michelle and Barry (her nickname) to task a lot as well.