In a surprisingly flattering profile in The New York Times, Marjorie Taylor Greene portrays herself as a political naif who actually believed Donald Trump’s campaign promises and suffered death threats once she broke with the president.

The article softens Greene’s image by omitting some of her most outrageous behavior. The story mentions that she “harassed 18-year-of gun activist David Hogg on the street,” without mentioning that Hogg was himself the survivor of a mass shooting at his high school. There’s no word about Greene calling Hogg “little Hitler” or about the time Greene kicked another teen activist. Nor is there any mention of Greene’s suggestion that Paul Pelosi, husband of then-speaker Nancy Pelosi, knew the man who assaulted him in his home, a homophobic lie circulated by the right.

None of Greene’s actions are presented as beyond the pale. Instead reporter Robert Draper characterizes her in far gentler terms than Greene’s behavior would admit: “Greene did harbor a genuine conspiratorial streak, often even wondering if this or that person wore a wire. But she was also becoming an increasingly shrewd and acerbic observer of life on Capitol Hill.”

    • Bakkoda@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Carefully edited transcripts, ignoring her past and pretending like she’s been playing the long game is fiction. It’s not censorship, it’s fiction. Honestly this isn’t that hard a take to figure out. Stir shit elsewhere.

    • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The story mentions that she “harassed 18-year-of gun activist David Hogg on the street,” without mentioning that Hogg was himself the survivor of a mass shooting at his high school.

      Pretty clear sane washing, but Imma assume you can’t read it anyway.

    • Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Leaving out the more extreme 2/3 of her actions when contextualizing while choosing to report what she is currently saying so she can construct a new image of herself to the voting public is “sanewashing”, yes. The complaint wasn’t about what the times did say (censorship), but what they didn’t.