Staff Reports
Kamala Harris is proving that when it comes to the media’s love affair with her, the honeymoon is far from over, despite her increasingly brazen behavior. It appears her favorite pastime is throwing shade at the very journalists who should be scrutinizing her work. While the press has feigned admiration for her, it seems that insults are now part of her communication strategy—a strategy that, if wielded by anyone with an ‘R’ after their name, would have resulted in an avalanche of criticism.
In the latest episode, Axios’s Sara Fischer laid out how Harris’s campaign has been playing fast and loose with the truth—specifically, by publishing ads using altered headlines from reputable news sources to bolster her image. For example, a genuine article from the U.K. Independent claiming Trump might pardon J6 rioters was cleverly repackaged to suggest that Kamala was the real defender of democracy. This alarming trend signals a clear shift from merely bending the truth to fully contorting it.
Harris campaign has been editing news headlines & descriptions in search ads that make it appear as if major outlets support her
—Google believes its sponsored disclosures are enough to keep voters from being misled, but media outlets may feel differentlyhttps://t.co/dU0KFhbeuy— Sara Fischer (@sarafischer) August 13, 2024
Amid these peculiar practices, Fischer tiptoed around the implications of Harris’s tactics. It is amusing how often the mainstream media, even in 2024, struggles to call a spade a spade. When Harris allows her campaign to create sham news stories that distort the facts, it would swiftly be labeled “fake news” if Trump ever entertained such a notion. Instead, Fischer provided an elaborate excuse for the campaign’s manipulation, citing a supposed “glitch” in Google’s ad policies as a mere technical hiccup rather than the glaring ethical breach it truly represents.
In a reality where Facebook’s strict policies have been enforcing transparency for seven years, why does Google choose to give Harris’s campaign a seemingly free pass? The contradictory handling of election-related advertising reflects broader media bias. If the right orchestrated such acts of political acrobatics, there would be wall-to-wall outrage across the airwaves. But for Kamala, it’s business as usual, with her handlers and sympathetic media types working overtime to downplay her underhanded tactics.
Even if the ad practices comply with Google’s rules—which is dubious at best—they put more nails in the coffin of the establishment media’s credibility. The irony isn’t lost that while seeking to evade accusations of bias, the media allows this kind of behavior to fester as if it’s just “collateral damage.” To think they can casually dismiss these tactics while simultaneously clinging to a veneer of journalistic integrity is rich.
Media coverage has decidedly failed to hold Harris accountable, turning a blind eye to her manipulation while engaging in faux outrage over former President Trump’s comments. If the press wants to avoid the label of bias, they might need to adopt a consistent approach that doesn’t just highlight the faux pas of Republicans while turning a blind eye to Democrats’ misdeeds. Instead of addressing the glaring deception at play, it’s almost as if they prefer Harris to keep dancing through the headlines without facing the consequences that justice demands. How much longer will this charade continue before even the most loyal media sycophants recognize that this isn’t just a case of bias—it’s a complete abdication of journalistic responsibility?
