So is anyone going to address the multiple objective studies showing Hillary getting by far the most negative coverage of any candidate, or will we just pretend they don't exist like anti-vaxxers do with inconvenient truths?
I mean, here's the thing, and it might be the biggest problem with the American news media today: False balance. Trump was objectively a bad candidate. Objectively worse than Hillary Clinton. As in, could pass the "any reasonable person" test with flying colors if you simply looked at the facts.
But one side supports Trump.
One side supports Clinton.
The media brought Hillary Clinton down to Trump's level, because of the faulty need to maintain the perception of balance.
If Hillary Clinton had run against literal Hitler, the media would have found a way to bring Clinton down to his level, and bring Hitler up to hers.
Yep, it's disgusting. But they also have a hatred for Hillary Clinton personally, and always have. They treated her just as harshly in 2007-2008 when her opponent was someone they adored.
