The media world went into overdrive with its analysis, with some pundits calling President Biden a ‘liar’ Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]


** OPINION
------------------------------------------------------------


** Media reaction to President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son, Hunter
------------------------------------------------------------
President Joe Biden, along with his son, Hunter, in July of this year. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

The media world on Monday was all in with the news that broke late Sunday night when President Joe Biden announced a full and unconditional pardon of his son, Hunter. The pardon includes a federal conviction for illegally buying a gun and for tax evasion.

President Biden said, in part, in a statement, “The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son — and that is wrong.”

On Monday, the media world went into overdrive with its analysis of the news. The cable news networks were especially on top of it, with CNN leading the way with plenty of hot takes.

The New York Times’ Peter Baker wrote ([link removed]) , “In pardoning his son Hunter Biden on Sunday night, the incumbent president sounded a lot like his successor by complaining about selective prosecution and political pressure, questioning the fairness of a system that Mr. Biden had until now long defended.”

The headline on Times conservative columnist Bret Stephens’ column ([link removed]) called the pardon “disgraceful.” Stephens wrote, “If Democrats want to understand one of the reasons the Republican Party is ascendant, they can look to President Biden’s pardon on Sunday for his son Hunter. In its rank mendacity, political hypocrisy, naked self-dealing and wretched example, it typifies so much of what so many Americans have come to detest about what the MAGA world calls ‘the swamp.’”

Stephens added, “What a degrading finale for Biden’s feeble, forgettable, frequently foolish presidency.”

The editorial board of The Washington Post wrote ([link removed]) , “To be clear: Mr. Biden had an unquestionable legal right to pardon his son Hunter. But in so doing on Sunday, he maligned the Justice Department and invited Mr. Trump to draw equivalence between the Hunter Biden pardon and any future moves Mr. Trump might take against the impartial administration of justice. He risks deepening many Americans’ suspicion that the justice system is two-tiered, justifying Mr. Trump’s drive to reshape it — or, because turnabout is fair play, to use it to benefit his own side.”

Alexander Burns, head of news at Politico, wrote ([link removed]) , “It is a rich gift to those who want to blow up the justice system as we know it, and who claim the government is a self-dealing club for hypocritical elites. It is a promise-breaking act that subjects Biden’s allies to yet another humiliation in a year packed with Biden-inflicted injuries. The decision comes at a moment when the capital is girding for an assault on federal law enforcement institutions led by President-elect Donald Trump and his appointees.”

Of course, conservative media outlets went bonkers, mostly because they have been obsessed with Hunter Biden for years. That obsession, and the fact that President-elect Donald Trump is showing every sign that he is out for retribution in his second term, likely helped lead to Biden’s decision.

Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson pointed out the obvious, writing ([link removed]) , “If I were President Joe Biden, I would have done the same thing. I would have pardoned a son who faced possible federal prison time not because of the crimes he committed, but because of me.”

Robinson added, “I can’t argue that pardoning Hunter was politically the right thing for the president to do. I’m not even sure it was morally the right thing for a president to do. But if my son were in Hunter’s position and I had the power, with the stroke of a pen, to save him and give him a fresh start, I’d do it. I believe many fathers would agree.”

The one thing that many in the media kept bringing up Monday was that, all along, Biden said he would not pardon his son. He said it throughout the campaign — both his and Kamala Harris’.

Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher wrote ([link removed]) that “the most damaging takes are from ostensibly objective media figures who willfully disregard the facts and the substance to bolster the idea that what the president did was some yuge travesty, and is equivalent — or worse — to the things Trump has done.”

Many who are criticizing the pardon do acknowledge, after plenty of hand-wringing, that Hunter Biden may have been treated unfairly or targeted for harsh punishment simply because he’s the president’s son. They then call President Biden a liar for now pardoning his son.

Christopher wrote, “Those statements are now being characterized as ‘lies’ — and for partisans like (CNN’s Scott) Jennings or (Donald) Trump, that’s a fair move. Without a doubt Democrats would say the same if the situation were reversed. But news personnel aren’t supposed to emulate partisans. There’s a big difference between ‘lying’ and changing your mind, and it is the duty of journalists (who thought of every euphemism they could to avoid calling Trump a liar) to give Americans all of the facts.”

Christopher continued, “First of all, when Biden made those pledges he was still running for president and was fairly certain civilly liable sexual predator and convicted felon was not going to succeed him, mitigating the need to protect Hunter from further attacks. Even after he dropped out, things were looking good for Vice President Kamala Harris — even in the days and hours before Trump’s surprise victory. During that time, Trump made attacking Hunter a regular part of his stump — a campaign of lies and discredited and debunked accusations that help explain why the president’s pardon encompasses such a wide time period.”

Again, the pardon also notes, correctly many would argue, that Hunter Biden had become a political pawn. Ankush Khardori, a senior writer for Politico, wrote just last week ([link removed]) , “Let’s start with a basic but important proposition: The cases against Hunter Biden probably would not have been brought against anyone else. This is not to excuse any of Hunter Biden’s conduct, but the gun charges have almost no real precedent, and the conduct underlying the tax charges is usually resolved by the Justice Department through repayment and/or fines. The reason we are here is because Trump and his Republican allies effectively — and successfully — pressured Joe Biden’s own Justice Department to prosecute his son.”

Some in the media argued that this tarnishes Biden’s presidency, but that feels like prisoner-of-the-moment talk. Soon, Donald Trump will move back into the White House. Perhaps he will use Biden’s pardon of his son as an excuse to do whatever he sees fit during his presidency.

But based on what we’ve seen from Trump, you get the feeling he doesn’t need an excuse to do whatever he wants to do, precedent or not.

A MESSAGE FROM POYNTER
[link removed]


** First-rate training for public media executives
------------------------------------------------------------

The Executive Editorial Integrity and Leadership Initiative offers local public media executives the tools and support they need to uphold public media’s highest editorial standards and advance goals for every part of their station.

Read more and apply now ([link removed]) .


** OK, this is rich
------------------------------------------------------------

Even those who would criticize Joe Biden’s pardon of his son had to roll their eyes at this tweet ([link removed]) sent out Monday morning:

“No one is above the law except the Presidents nepo baby is a helluva parting message for democrats…”

Who tweeted that? Meghan McCain, former co-host of “The View” and, more famously, daughter of the late Sen. John McCain.


** On second thought
------------------------------------------------------------

Here is certainly an example of switching opinions for political gain. CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski reports ([link removed]) that Karoline Leavitt, who is set to become White House press secretary after Donald Trump takes office, deleted two social media posts that she shared in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 insurrection. One was a retweet that praised then-Vice President Mike Pence for certifying the 2020 election. In another post, Leavitt was responding to a video of the Capitol Police officer who faked out rioters inside the Capitol building by luring them away from lawmakers. Leavitt wrote: “A hero.”

Yet, Leavitt’s tune had changed by 2022 when she ran unsuccessfully for a New Hampshire congressional seat. By that time, Leavitt was an election denier, running on her false belief that Joe Biden did not win the election.

Kaczynski wrote, “Leavitt’s shift from praising those who defended the democratic process on January 6 to embracing election denialism reflects a broader trend among Republicans who initially distanced themselves from Trump after the riot, only to rally behind him later as his grip on the party tightened.”

Now Leavitt, 27, is about to become the youngest White House press secretary ever.

The Trump campaign did not comment specifically on CNN’s reporting about the deleted tweet, but in a statement to the network, Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, said, “Karoline was completely correct in saying there were irregularities with the 2020 election and any cases of fraud should be investigated in order to protect and preserve the sanctity of our Democracy. She will make a wonderful Press Secretary championing the policies and agenda of President Trump, and there is nobody better who can articulate that to the public.”


** A new (and controversial) voice
------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Jennings, shown here in 2021. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis)

Catching up on this from last week. Scott Jennings — the former adviser in the George W. Bush White House who is mostly seen these days smirking and offering pro-Trump opinions on CNN — will now have another place to share his conservative views. He is joining the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times.

The move comes after the paper’s owner, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, decided the Times would not be making an endorsement for president. The board had planned to endorse Kamala Harris.

Back in October, Soon-Shiong said, “I think it’s important for us to differentiate the editorial board is responsible for these opinions on these voices. So, right now, we don’t have an editorial board if we are truly honest about ourselves that are balanced. And so, I’ve gotten beaten up about fair and balance. So, I’m looking for people like Scott Jennings.”

In a post on X, Soon-Shiong wrote, “Growing the board with experts who have thoughtful balanced views and new candidates are accepting the challenge to join us!”

In a lengthy post on X ([link removed]) , Jennings wrote, in part, “I love newspapers and believe in strong journalism and strong opinion pages that represent a wide array of views. I approach my commentary jobs by starting with the truth and then providing my honest opinion based on my conservative values and experience. I think Dr Soon-Shiong is doing something important and groundbreaking and am honored he asked me to play a role in that. Roughly half (or more) of the country often feels like legacy media doesn’t care what it thinks and has little interest in fairly representing its views and values. I plan to represent those Americans who believe they are often ignored or even ridiculed in legacy media and applaud Dr Soon-Shiong’s move to bring balance to the editorial board.”

In his Status media newsletter ([link removed]) , Oliver Darcy wrote last week that an interview with Soon-Shiong grew “combative” when Darcy asked about Jennings joining the Times’ editorial board. Darcy also wrote that the interview was eventually cut off by a Times spokesperson.

Soon-Shiong praised Jennings’ appearances on CNN, saying Jennings was “respectful” and “thoughtful” in making his points with the other panelists. Darcy correctly pointed out that it's “debatable” that Jennings is respectful to other panelists.

Darcy then wrote, “His entire career hinges on defending a politician who subjects the populace to an endless stream of lies and conspiracy theories.”

According to Darcy, Soon-Shiong said it was merely Darcy’s “opinion” that Trump lies more than other politicians. Darcy wrote, “I pushed back, noting that the depths of his dishonesty have been well-documented by fact-based news organizations. Soon-Shiong didn’t apparently appreciate that. He scolded me for making ‘a statement.’ ‘If you want to talk about Donald Trump, that’s not the conversation I started with,’ the billionaire said, clearly annoyed.”

When Darcy explained that he only brought up Trump because Soon-Shiong had just hired one of Trump’s staunchest defenders to be on his editorial board, Soon-Shiong accused Darcy of having a “bias” and told Darcy, “This is really what I think is the matter with the country.”

Later in the interview, after some more back-and-forth, Soon-Shiong called Darcy a “so-called reporter.” A Times spokesperson who was on the call said that Soon-Shiong had “pretty much answered all the questions” Darcy had.

Darcy said he responded by saying, “No, to be honest, you haven’t answered all the questions I have.” But Darcy wrote the rep “ended the interview, signaling to (Soon-Shiong) to hang up the phone.”


** Media tidbits
------------------------------------------------------------
* The Wall Street Journal’s Keach Hagey, Emily Glazer and Dana Mattioli with “Musk’s Rivals Fear He Will Target Them With His New Power.” ([link removed])
* The Hollywood Reporter’s Alex Weprin with “TelevisaUnivision Hit With Layoffs as CEO Daniel Alegre Launches Sweeping Reorganization.” ([link removed])
* Axios has hired Marc Caputo as a senior politics reporter. Caputo is a Miami-based politics reporter for The xxxxxx. He previously worked at NBC News and Politico.
* Nieman Lab’s Hanaa’ Tameez with “News outlets push vertical video to the homepage.” ([link removed])
* The New York Times’ Sarah Bahr with “Behind the Scenes With Our Thanksgiving Day Parade Reporter.” ([link removed])


** Hot type
------------------------------------------------------------
* The staff of The Washington Post began a seven-part series on Monday: “Scammed: How a con man stole a woman’s life’s savings.” ([link removed])
* For Esquire, Patrick Fealey with a firsthand account of what it’s like to be homeless in America: “The Invisible Man.” ([link removed])
* The Washington Post’s Paul Schwartzman with “Ho-Ho-Hubcaps? How roadside trash became one man’s Christmas inspiration.” ([link removed])
* The New York Times’ Manohla Dargis and Alissa Wilkinson with “Best Movies of 2024.” ([link removed])


** More resources for journalists
------------------------------------------------------------
* Leadership Academy for Women in Media ([link removed]) applications close soon.
* Early bird applications to Transform your crime coverage ([link removed]) close this Friday!
* Our training ([link removed]) for public media executives application period ends this week.

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) .
[link removed]
I want more analysis of the news media to help me understand my world. ([link removed])
GIVE NOW ([link removed])

ADVERTISE ([link removed]) // DONATE ([link removed]) // LEARN ([link removed]) // JOBS ([link removed])
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here. ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20for%20Poynter
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
© All rights reserved Poynter Institute 2024
801 Third Street South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
If you don't want to receive email updates from Poynter, we understand.
You can change your subscription preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe from all Poynter emails ([link removed]) .