Vice President Kamala Harris has faced criticism for her lack of interviews and news conferences, despite the significant media coverage she has received. Critics argue that her refusal to engage with the press is a sign of arrogance and suggests she is not accountable to the public.
## Article:
Kamala Harris' Lack of Interviews Draws Scrutiny
The political media has come under fire for fawning over Vice President Kamala Harris' "momentum" and gravitas, even as she has refused to grant interviews or hold press conferences for weeks.
Time magazine published a glowing cover story on Harris, complete with a painterly portrait and the headline "Her Moment." Yet, as writer Charlotte Alter admitted, "Harris has yet to do a single substantive interview or to explain her policy shifts."
Kamala Harris' Lack of Interviews Draws Scrutiny
The contrast with her predecessor, Donald Trump, is stark. Trump sat for an 83-minute interview with Time and allowed a long "fact check" that took 21 minutes to read.
Harris' lack of transparency has been a source of frustration for journalists, who argue that she is not accountable to the public. "Giving access to the press gets you precisely nothing," wrote Fox News contributor Tim Graham.
Kamala Harris' Lack of Interviews Draws Scrutiny
Instead of holding Harris accountable, the media has engaged in a flurry of puffery, comparing her to pop-music superstars like Beyoncé and Taylor Swift. Time even invoked "Star Wars" puffery, with Sen. Cory Booker claiming Harris has "mastered the art of ‘arm twisting’ required to pass major legislation."
Critics argue that the media's fawning over Harris is a form of "vibe shifting," an attempt to create the illusion of momentum and enthusiasm. "The media pretend that Harris creates 'vibe shifts,' as if their incessant proclamations about her 'momentum' and her 'joyous warrior' poses aren’t part of the vibe-shifting attempt," Graham wrote.
Harris' image as a competent and effective leader has also been dented by reports of a high staff turnover and allegations of a toxic work environment. However, the media has been quick to dismiss these criticisms, blaming the problems on Harris' staff rather than on herself.
The media's treatment of Harris stands in stark contrast to its treatment of Trump. Trump was subjected to relentless scrutiny and hostile interviews, while Harris has been given a free pass.
This double standard has raised questions about the media's objectivity and its willingness to hold those in power accountable. As Graham writes, "Time, like other slavishly pro-Biden-Harris outlets, will never acknowledge that Biden's number-three Justice Department official Matthew Colangelo’s resignation to join Alvin Bragg’s team of Trump prosecutors shreds the 'no evidence' lie."
The media's fawning over Harris is a disservice to the public and undermines the principles of journalism. It is essential for journalists to hold those in power accountable, regardless of their political affiliation or popularity.
