In the interview available here, the former “Will & Grace” star objects to how American democracy was “attacked and infiltrated by Russia.” Radford then follows her comments by asking about the “best way to make our voices heard” in order to “neutralize” the threat posed by the “current administration to democracy.”
In a recent column, I wrote about how the media seems to be struggling with notions of neutrality in coverage of the Administration. I also believe that the allegations of Russian interference should be investigated (though as I previously wrote we have a long history of even greater forms of interference in other countries). At one time, such statements would have resulted in outrage from the media, which has long jealously protected its neutrality in coverage. Now it seems commonplace that a national reporter would refer to “our” voices in protests and describe the current Administration as a threat to democracy.
I am perfectly willing to accept the interview as a major slip or unguarded moment, but there should be some official response to such coverage to reaffirm that reporters are not advocates in coverage.
What do you think?