Media's Role in Candidate Accountability Under Scrutiny

In current political discourse, a significant point of contention revolves around the media's role in reporting on candidates. Critics assert that by not adequately covering a certain candidate's choice to remain ‘in the basement’ and avoid interviews, the press aids in her strategic avoidance of scrutiny. Not only does this practice undermine journalistic integrity, but it inflates the candidate's influence without accountability. With essential issues like fracking and border policy emerging in debates, it raises questions of the media's responsibility to investigate potential discrepancies in the candidate's record as she shifts towards a more moderate stance. The failure to engage both sides of the political spectrum in dialogue about her credibility highlights a growing concern that the media might prioritize sensationalism over substantive reporting. Critics argue that the media should delve deeper into whether the candidate's recent changes are genuine or politically motivated, calling into question the effectiveness of today’s press in holding public figures accountable.