I'm confused. But that often happens when reading Sarah Palin's Facebook media critiques.
The occasion for the latest confusion is that The Daily Caller has its newest installment in its sleep-walking series about the defunct listserv known as Journolist. This (supposedly) dark tale revolved around emails that often liberal opinion writers exchanged in the late summer of 2008 when Palin was tapped as Sen. John McCain's VP choice and stupid rumors began to circulate that she was not the mother of her new baby son, Trig; that she had faked the pregnancy.
From Palin (or Palin's FB ghostwriter) [emphasis added]:
It's tough to fittingly describe these numerous members of the mainstream media who actively engaged in the debate about this conspiracy back when I was first introduced as John McCain's running mate, and it's impossible to legitimize any "prominent" media publication that continues to traffic in this bizarre narrative today. It wasn't just a few fringe characters in that JournoList discussion. It included writers for major newspapers, magazines, and online news publications. Those participating in this immature exchange in attempts to plant seeds of doubt and falsely accuse even included a famous historian.
See how she's moved the bar? Suddenly Palin's denouncing anyone connected to the media world who exchanged off-the-record emails about the topic of Trig in 2008 and then refused to write about it for publication. She's denouncing, for instance, journalists who emailed fellow journalists on the listserv and strongly counseled them to leave the Trig story alone. (Blogger Ezra Klein: "By all accounts she's a wonderful mother, and devoted to her fifth son. Leave this be.")
That's who Palin's now teeing off and denouncing as being despicable, journalists who out a sense of fair play did not write about Trig in 2008, but may have privately emailed friends about the topic???
Also, notice in her FB missive Palin berates journalists associated with "major newspapers, magazines, and online news publications." But Palin can't, and didn't, point to any of the "major newspapers, magazines, and online news publications" that wrote about Trig in a conspiratorial way back in 2008. Why? Because none of them did. Because back in 2008, 99 percent of people in "the media" did the right thing and ignored the Trig nonsense. And those few online players who did tackle the issue were instantly called out.
As I noted in 2009, when Palin started rewriting this history for her own political benefit:
In truth, if you go back and look at the how the press treated the story in real time (as opposed to the mythmaking that conservatives have done since), the press behaved precisely how Palin says it should have -- and exactly unlike how Palin claims it did. Meaning, reporters did not immediately embrace, believe, or publicize the pregnancy rumor. Instead, they acted responsibly: They asked questions and searched for facts from the McCain campaign before even thinking about giving the rumor any publicity. They did not push the Trig conspiracy story.
Yet ever since 2008 Palin has been playing the Trig card in search of sympathy and pretending she and her child were mercilessly attacked by the liberal media. (Scribes even emailed each other about it!)
Gimme a break. The only one trying to make hay out of the Trig story these days is Palin herself. It's unsightly and she ought to stop it.