The Media's Fetterman Fail
Two scandals engulf Pennsylvania's US Senate race: Democrats' coverup of John Fetterman's cognitive ability, and the media's complicity. Meet the reporters who failed.
Like most people, even Pennsylvanians, I didn’t watch Tuesday night’s lone debate between the Keystone State’s two major party nominees for US Senate. More important than the debates themselves is what people and the press say about them afterward - the “echo chamber.” That’s what most people see and hear, and it drives polling numbers and final momentum.
And what’s being said about Tuesday’s debate is incredible. There’s never been a debate like this, at least in modern political history.
What is clear: John Fetterman, his campaign, and his political party covered up - lied - about the true nature of his mental, if not his physical, condition after a debilitating stroke on May 13, just days before the Democratic primary. Here’s what his campaign said two days after his stroke:
“It’s a good reminder to listen to your body and be aware of the signs. The good news is I’m feeling much better, and the doctors tell me I didn’t suffer any cognitive damage. I’m well on my way to a full recovery.”
It’s good that he encouraged people to listen to their bodies and be watchful of “the signs.” And we all hope he’s well on his way “to a full recovery.” But he said this just weeks later:
“The stroke I suffered on May 13 didn’t come out of nowhere. Like so many others, and so many men in particular, I avoided going to the doctor, even though I knew I didn’t feel well. As a result, I almost died. I want to encourage others to not make the same mistake.”
As for cognitive damage, it has been on full display since NBC reporter Dasha Burns reported on the true nature of his condition, including a “difficult time” understanding small talk. Burns was criticized or experienced pushback by her colleagues at NBC, including “Today Show” host Savannah Guthrie and elsewhere. The candidate’s enablest wife, Gisele Fetterman, demanded her punishment.
As FoxNews reported:
Fox News Digital reported Wednesday on several prominent liberal journalists who, contrary to Burns, insisted that Fetterman was completely coherent during their interviews with him.
After seeing clips of Burns’ interview with Fetterman, Vox’s Kara Swisher tweeted, "Sorry to say but I talked to @JohnFetterman for over an hour without stop or any aides and this is just nonsense. Maybe this reporter is just bad at small talk."
Liberal YouTube personality Brian Tyler Cohen tweeted, "Here’s my interview with @JohnFetterman from a few days ago. The notion that he wasn’t able to understand is mind-numbingly false."
And New York Magazine writer Rebecca Traister wrote, "As someone who has recently interviewed him: Fetterman’s comprehension is not at all impaired. He understands everything, it’s just that he reads it (which requires extra acuity, I’d argue) and responds in real time. It’s a hearing/auditory processing challenge."
Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, speaks in Philadelphia on Sept. 24, 2022. (AP Photo/Ryan Collerd) (The Associated Press)
Back on "Today," Burns continued: "I will say, it’s important to note that according to the campaign itself, our team was the first to be in the room with Fetterman for an interview rather than via remote video conference and myself, my producer and our crew did find that small talk before that captioning was difficult because of those auditory processing issues I mentioned."
She added, "Now, stroke experts do say that this does not mean he has any cognitive impairment, doesn’t mean his memory or his cognition is impaired, and he can fully recover from this. And once the closed captioning was on, he was able to fully understand my questions throughout that 25-minute interview."
Anyone who watched the unedited video or the debate live knows that Burns was not only being truthful but bending backward to be fair, if not favorable, to Fetterman.
Here are the comments from disreputable journalists, courtesy of Fox News Digital. Names are emphasized, so you take note of them and their outlets:
"I interviewed @JohnFetterman here, he understood everything I was saying and he was funny," podcast host Molly Jong-Fast said.
"As someone who has recently interviewed him: Fetterman’s comprehension is not at all impaired. He understands everything, it’s just that he reads it (which requires extra acuity, I’d argue) and responds in real time. It’s a hearing/auditory processing challenge," New York Magazine writer Rebecca Traister defended Fetterman.
"I interviewed him - there were absolutely no issues. I probably stumbled more," MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle wrote in a now-deleted tweet.
Trust in the media is at an all-time low. This is yet another reason why. Meanwhile, one journo at the Washington Post blames Donald Trump for this. NBC “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd blames Fox News.
They and their organizations should look into a mirror.
Here are more disreputable journalists piling on Burns’ solid reporting.
"This is ableist af and you should delete this tweet," Crooks and Liars managing editor Karoli Kuns told the Times reporter.
"This clip makes it abundantly obvious Fetterman has no cognitive issues. He only has mild speech and hearing issues," Raw Story reporter Matthew Chapman wrote.
"I’m not comfortable with reporters who think people who need closed captions aren’t capable of being senators," Vulture editor Josef Adalian reacted to O'Keefe. "Deaf people rely on captions to see Mr. O’Keefe’s reports. Does he question whether they can comprehend those words?"
"Ed- I thought or hoped we had passed this kind of prejudice," Robert Shrum for the USC Center of Political Future shamed the CBS reporter.
"Wow. This is a terrible tweet. Not sure if Ed really believes this or if Oz's campaign just suggested it, but the ableism is pretty disturbing. Nothing in the interview suggests Fetterman wouldn't be up to the job," New York Daily News columnist Brandon Friedman said.
"What’s next? Going after the seeing and hearing impaired? Revolting. You should all be ashamed of yourselves," TV producer Steven DeKnight shamed Burns.
Robert Shrum is not a journalist but a long-time Democratic political consultant and author who is too happy to pile on with the narrative.
And there’s this tremendous hot take from one of America’s worst media outlets, the turgid Philadelphia Inquirer, which is happy to provide cover for Fetterman at every opportunity.
Fetterman is recovering from a stroke and ensuing language disabilities, and relies on closed captioning as a result. Recently, the disability community and allies have voiced their utter disappointment at the way the public is talking about that.
Take, for instance, a recent NBC interview with Fetterman, in which the host spent a significant amount of time focusing on the need for closed captioning. Politicians, journalists, and others all had something to say. “Will Pennsylvanians be comfortable with someone representing them who had to conduct a TV interview this way?” asked CBS News correspondent Ed O’Keefe. “John Fetterman is simply not capable of doing this job,” proclaimed Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator.
The discourse can be summed up in one word: ableist.
It’s a reflection of a larger issue: our country’s persisting discomfort around disabled bodies and minds. In some ways, it’s not surprising, given the fact that we continue to see so few visible examples of people with disabilities integrated into everyday life.
This is your reminder, especially to the imbecilic Inky reporter, that Senator Santorum is the father of a disabled daughter (trisomy 18).
And the gaslighting will continue until. . .
That Slate tweet reminds me of this.
Peter Savodnik of Common Sense News provides two more examples of journalism failures, including the spouse of a sitting Democratic US Senator from Ohio.
Connie Schultz, a USAToday columnist and the wife of Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, observed: “As he continues to recover, @JohnFetterman used technology to help him answer a reporter’s questions. How we as journalists frame this reveals more about us than it does him.”
The Atlantic’s John Hendrickson suggested that the problem wasn’t Fetterman but, well, us. “Part of our culture’s ongoing stigmatization of disability stems from our profound lack of understanding about the variability—and spectrum—of physical and mental challenges.”
Every one of these “reporters” owes Burns and their audiences an apology. They should remove their blue jerseys and rediscover a lost profession.
The spin machine is already whirring away, with journalists claiming that it was the technology that was to blame or that Fetterman was brave to debate Oz or that, as Rebecca Traister put it, Fetterman should be lauded for his “remarkable transparency.” Josh Krashaar, at Axios, was honest and ballsy enough to report that Democrats on Capitol Hill were left rattled by Fetterman’s performance.
Far from shielding Fetterman from scrutiny, in the end too many journalists in the legacy media have simply revealed—once again—why they cannot be trusted. From Russiagate to the lab leak theory to the riots in the summer of 2020 to the effect of school closures during the pandemic, reporters seem increasingly incapable of reporting honestly and comprehensively on the most important issues of the day. Last night, for anyone who was watching the debate with eyes wide open, that much was indisputable. Don’t hold your breath for anything to change anytime soon.
Don’t hold your breath for the media to change.
Our leftist media is primarily responsible for the “death of democracy.” Hold them accountable.