In @newrepublic, I ask, if an attempted mass execution at the Capitol—where reporters could have died and Republicans were both accomplices to the crime and rejected for history that their lives mattered—doesn’t end both sides journalism, what will?
newrepublic.com/article/161361…
newrepublic.com/article/161361…
Editors and outlets have an obligation to protect their reporters. This used to mean from bullying sources who were unhappy with stories. We are now asking Capitol Hill journalists to divorce their humanity from their reporting, which is dangerous both for them and for the public
Watching the impeachment and professionals who were both survivors and chroniclers of the crime contort themselves into treating both sides as equivalent when one side clearly tried to get them killed was deeply painful for me. 
And everyone, especially the powerful people in media, should take a step back and think about how profoundly messed up and broken it is to ask reporters and the country to sanitize this event because they’re afraid of specious accusations of bias.
The only people served by this are the Republicans who invested years saying the media was biased against them to the point that during a violent insurrection, “Murder the Meida” was etched into a Capitol door. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Lastly, please make it to the end. I believe there are Capitol Hill reporters who will leave their jobs in journalism because forcing them to do this work while they are navigating PTSD and covering people who voted for history that there trauma didn’t matter will be too much.
Their**** oh no!!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
