A tweetstorm from Paul Krugman

  • 1
    There's a lot of angry back and forth about how this happened, and I understand the motivation. But it's an argument that nobody will win 1/
  • 2
    What we can say is that one contributor was an incredible case of media failure, which went far beyond false equivalence 2/
  • 3
    For one thing: when people say that HRC could have won if she had taken different policy positions, how was that supposed to have worked? 3/
  • 4
    The news media devoted almost no time to policy, and literally zero to the most important issue, climate. How cld policy have mattered? 4/
  • 5
    What was covered, endlessly, was emails -- a bullshit issue, of zero relevance. More broadly, there was a sniggering hostility to HRC 5/
  • 6
    And then there was the way media allowed themselves to be played by Wikileaks, Comey, etc when it was obvious what was happening 6/
  • 7
    I'm not saying that this media fail was the whole story. But it was a *systematic* failure -- and it will probably happen again 7/
  • 8
    Trying to understand why that happened seems to me a lot more important than second-guessing campaign strategy. But here's my worry 8/
  • 9
    My guess is that very few of the editors, etc who did this will admit to themselves, or anyone else, that they did anything wrong 9/