Two prominent Democrats in Washington have been condemned by women as sexual harassers and abusers. Senator Franken of Minnesota and Congressman Conyers of Michigan have been accused of misconduct and those accusations spread in the media. It's been interesting, however, to see the difference in the media reaction to the two stories.
First let's talk about what is alleged. Franken is on film groping a sleeping woman during a USO tour some years ago. He is also alleged to have repeatedly groped other women, supposedly in jest (according to Franken). There is no way to deny the photograph, so Franken apologized. Franken also apologized for the other instances but claims he remembers them differently. Conyers is said to have fired a staffer after she refused his sexual advances. He paid the woman a substantial settlement when she filed a claim, but Conyers says it is for severance pay rather than for damages due to sexual misconduct. Other staffers and women who worked with Conyers have also accused him of making improper advances or meeting with them when he was in his underwear. The conduct is alleged to have gone on for many years.
So, which of the two is worse? Is it Franken's groping or Conyers demands for sex? They're both clearly wrong, but I think it's pretty clear that what Conyers did is worse. After all, Franken can say with a straight face that he was just joking. I don't believe him, but it's at least plausible. Conyers and his conduct was no joke under any circumstances.
And which story has gotten more coverage? Again, the answer is clear: Franken. To be clear, the media has not covered either story with the missionary zeal used in the attacks against Roy Moore. Moore, of course, is the GOP candidate for senate in Alabama who is accused by three women of sexual misconduct. I get why the Republican is the subject of relentless media attack and the Democrats are not. It's just regular media bias. But why is Franken nevertheless subject to much more negative coverage than Conyers? Franken may be a senator and Conyers a congressman, but that doesn't explain the difference. Conyers has great seniority and is the ranking member of an important committee. Franken makes a lot of noise but holds little power in the Senate. If anything, Conyers is the more important target.
My guess about why Franken is covered and Conyers gets something of a pass is that Conyers is African American. Many in the media do not want to be accused of being racist by providing negative coverage for Conyers, so they hold back. Just today, Nancy Pelosi was defending Conyers on TV. She too does not want her actions labeled as "racist", so she's calling for a presumption of innocence. Just imagine Pelosi saying the same thing about Roy Moore. Okay, that may be too difficult to do, but you get the picture.
I don't know if Conyers actually did any of the things of which he is accused. It ought not be too difficult to ascertain, however, since the main claim of wrongdoing was settled under the auspices of the House itself. There should be records that can be reviewed here to see who is telling the truth.
First let's talk about what is alleged. Franken is on film groping a sleeping woman during a USO tour some years ago. He is also alleged to have repeatedly groped other women, supposedly in jest (according to Franken). There is no way to deny the photograph, so Franken apologized. Franken also apologized for the other instances but claims he remembers them differently. Conyers is said to have fired a staffer after she refused his sexual advances. He paid the woman a substantial settlement when she filed a claim, but Conyers says it is for severance pay rather than for damages due to sexual misconduct. Other staffers and women who worked with Conyers have also accused him of making improper advances or meeting with them when he was in his underwear. The conduct is alleged to have gone on for many years.
So, which of the two is worse? Is it Franken's groping or Conyers demands for sex? They're both clearly wrong, but I think it's pretty clear that what Conyers did is worse. After all, Franken can say with a straight face that he was just joking. I don't believe him, but it's at least plausible. Conyers and his conduct was no joke under any circumstances.
And which story has gotten more coverage? Again, the answer is clear: Franken. To be clear, the media has not covered either story with the missionary zeal used in the attacks against Roy Moore. Moore, of course, is the GOP candidate for senate in Alabama who is accused by three women of sexual misconduct. I get why the Republican is the subject of relentless media attack and the Democrats are not. It's just regular media bias. But why is Franken nevertheless subject to much more negative coverage than Conyers? Franken may be a senator and Conyers a congressman, but that doesn't explain the difference. Conyers has great seniority and is the ranking member of an important committee. Franken makes a lot of noise but holds little power in the Senate. If anything, Conyers is the more important target.
My guess about why Franken is covered and Conyers gets something of a pass is that Conyers is African American. Many in the media do not want to be accused of being racist by providing negative coverage for Conyers, so they hold back. Just today, Nancy Pelosi was defending Conyers on TV. She too does not want her actions labeled as "racist", so she's calling for a presumption of innocence. Just imagine Pelosi saying the same thing about Roy Moore. Okay, that may be too difficult to do, but you get the picture.
I don't know if Conyers actually did any of the things of which he is accused. It ought not be too difficult to ascertain, however, since the main claim of wrongdoing was settled under the auspices of the House itself. There should be records that can be reviewed here to see who is telling the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment