The Hack Gap Revisited: “Lipstick on a Pig” Edition

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


When I saw the video clip of Meghan McCain saying, “No one knows what war is like other than my family” I knew that she meant to say “No one knows what war is like BETTER than my family.” So I didn’t write about it on our blog.

Then I saw that conservatives are actually acting outraged over this “lipstick on a pig” nonsense. And it smacked me in the face: the hack gap had struck again.

The hack gap is the difference between political observers and writers on the left and on the right. Those on the left (most, anyway) give the benefit of the doubt. They have a sense of shame. They are willing to consider the validity of something before running with it. And they don’t try to disguise obviously phony outrage as genuine outrage.

As this “lipstick” thing illustrates (as well as any example you can find with five seconds of searching), the right doesn’t operate the same way. And that’s one of the reasons why it wins.

And let me add that I’m aware I occasionally complain in this space that the left doesn’t play tough enough. And I’m aware that by not writing about the Meghan McCain clip, I would appear to be committing the sin for which I criticize others. But I’d like to believe you can get tough without being disingenuous. And besides, our readers would revolt if I treated an obvious verbal slip by a candidate’s child as indicative of something more serious. The fact that Limbaugh’s audience eats that sort of thing up doesn’t necessarily mean ours does.

The takeaway? The left has two problems: a lack of hacks and a lack of a market for hacks.

Update: Mike Huckabee refuses to be a hack.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest