Read on Twitter
I’m extremely torn about what media coverage should be in this moment of transition from Trump to Biden. On one hand, good governance is important and the revolving door is bad! But on the other Republicans are being so hypocritical and enabled Trump to skirt Senate confirmations
Things seem to be trending toward “snapping back” to the before times and acting as if the last four years did not happen, returning to a place where Daschle’s nomination got tanked because of back taxes owed, as if an Illegal Acting Chad hasn’t been running DHS for months.
Tanden will get the most attention because of her history as a twitter troll (although, hey! Remember when Twitter Troll Rick Grenell was Acting DNI!) but the questions facing Blinken, and possibly Flournoy if she is presented, are much more significant.
Should people seeking the highest roles in government be encouraged, through these confirmations, to insider trade on their own personal government futures in the private sector, for example, with major defense contracting firms they then will give contracts to while serving?
I think the answer should be no. And had media focus on Trump been more about framing his administration through government malfeasance and corruption, framing Biden’s choices through this lens and measured properly on the equivalence scale would provide continuity in coverage.
But now, Senate Republicans are going to run wild and use their mainstream media-granted freedom to weaponize blantant hypocrisy to take the unprecedented step of denying Biden the cabinet of his choosing. I don’t know what the right answer is here in terms of approach.
I wish standard-bearers like the @nytimes had a public editor to grapple with these questions. There may not be a right answer, but at least publicly asking the questions would provide a level of curiosity, transparency and responsiveness that could help us move forward.
