The Washington Post knew about one of the Alitos’ insurrectionist flags

Shocking news from — and about — The Washington Post: the paper knew (free link) that an insurrectionist flag was flying over Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito’s house in January 2021, right after the attempted coup, and didn’t publish anything. From today’s Post story:

The Post decided not to report on the episode at the time because the flag-raising appeared to be the work of Martha-Ann Alito, rather than the justice, and connected to a dispute with her neighbors, a Post spokeswoman said. It was not clear then that the argument was rooted in politics, the spokeswoman said.

Needless to say, whenever something is “not clear,” that can often be rectified with reporting.

Leave a comment | Read comments

Discover more from Media Nation

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “The Washington Post knew about one of the Alitos’ insurrectionist flags”

  1. I have long been puzzled by how often so-called mainstream media outlets either give conservatives the benefit of the doubt (even when it is not deserved), or backtrack when they are confronted by (opportunistic) politicians accusing them of bias. Over and over, Republicans seem very adept at manipulating the coverage they receive. Whether it’s the Alito story, or the alleged “liberal indoctrination” on college campuses, or downplaying Trump’s numerous pro-fascism comments while focusing like a laser on the times Joe Biden misspeaks (which he has been doing for 50 years), the Post, the Times, and others seem to believe it’s somehow wrong to criticize one side without finding something wrong with the other side– even if the two are not even remotely equivalent. However, this “bothsidesism” presents a false & distorted picture, and it misinforms the public. I understand that mainstream outlets live in mortal terror of seeming anti-conservative, but if the facts warrant a negative article about something a big-name conservative did, so be it. Why are conservatives so successful at “working the refs”?

  2. “Needless to say, whenever something is ‘not clear,’ that can often be rectified with reporting.” Love this, Dan!

Comments are closed.