Scandal: Hillary Clinton, known for standing up against gendered violence, caught in cover-up

I encountered these articles upon my father’s suggestion. I was drawn to it because Hillary Clinton’s ability to maintain credibility as a strong female leader despite her husband’s indiscretions has always fascinated me. What happened was that Juanita Broaddrick, a player in Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign, recently came out saying that the former president raped her 38 years ago, with particular mention of Hillary Clinton “strong-arming” her into keeping quiet about it. As a result, both Hillary and Lena Dunham, a public supporter of Clinton’s campaign, are being discredited. The quote by Broaddrick of what Clinton said was “She said, “I just want to tell you how much Bill and I appreciate the things you do for him,’ … She looked at me real stern. Then she took my hand and held on to it and she said, ‘Do you understand? Everything you do,’”.

From what we’ve been taught of rape myth and its prominence, shouldn’t Broaddrick’s accusations be being refuted? By what we’ve learned, the public tends to think critically of rape victims, especially those with little evidence and information about the occurrence. I mean, even the article on the 11-year-old girl with video evidence of gang rape held stipulation. So why is it then, that in this instance the journalists are questioning the integrity of Hillary Clinton and Lena Dunham rather than Broaddrick? The focus in all of the articles I could find circulating the issue is entirely detached from both the victim and the perpetrator, but rather redirected toward his wife and Dunham.

I found this whole situation to be frustrating, although I can see that it was probably because media tends toward the most profitable story. Given Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the upcoming presidential elections with heavy emphasis on the strength of women and Dunham’s identification as a strong feminist, the controversy involved made for more interesting articles than “yet another Bill Clinton scandal”. I do, however, see this as being a fault in journalism. As discussed in class and one of the readings, in order to provide better media we need balance and unbiased diction --- two things that are poorly executed in all three of these articles.

How do you think the journalists could have improved their reported so as to fairly report on the issue in all aspects, rather than focusing on the discrediting of Hillary Clinton and Lena Dunham?

Article 1

Article 2

Article 3

Image