Hillary and the Press

Journalists have a job, which is to tell the story, history as it’s happening, the work in progress that is the story of mankind. That’s the way it used to be. Or maybe not, you can find partisanship in newspapers at pretty much any point in history when there’s been newspapers. Thomas Nast was not exactly objective. In fact, it may have been entrenched politicians offended by his work that led to the word ‘nasty.’ (I just made that up and it probably has no basis in truth whatsoever.)
Anyway, in theory, that’s their job. That’s the way Walter Cronkite saw it, that’s what I was taught back in journalism school.
There’s still a difference, though, between those who say they are being objective but subtly choose language which is more advantageous to one side than another (one columnists freedom fighter is another’s terrorist) and those who are blatantly partisan and don’t give a shit who sees it.
The reason I’m discussing this is Martin O’Malley. He has announced his candidacy, it’s official and I’ve seen several news outlets saying “O’Malley Challenges Clinton for Nomination.” That is slipping into blatantly partisan and don’t give a shit who sees it territory. The headlines should either read “O’Malley Seeks Democratic Nomination” or “O’Malley Challenges Clinton and Sanders for Nomination.”
They make it sound like Hillary Clinton already has the nomination and it must be wrested from her grasp, which isn’t true at all. No caucuses or primaries have been held, no delegates selected.
But, we can see that she has the press on her side.