After the New York Times published an article in early June about the Senate candidate Graham Platner’s treatment of the women he dated, the story’s main source reacted with disappointment and anger.

It was a “gift to the Platner campaign”, charged Lyndsey Fifield, who had dated the Democratic combat veteran years ago and who spoke candidly to the Times about that experience.

The story’s headline called his behavior “unsettling”. That adjective seemed particularly careful and quite mild if you read deeper into the story. And the story’s narrative approach – including a long lead-in from the perspective of the Platner campaign – was notably indirect.

But those who read the article would eventually encounter Fifield’s shocking recollection of how Platner allegedly grabbed her by the shoulders hard enough to leave marks, once yanked her out of a cab against her will, and how during one argument, “he twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom and held the door closed from the other side so she couldn’t get out.” She also told Times reporters that Platner would refer to women as “hatchet wounds”, referring to female anatomy.

Platner vehemently denied any violence, and the Times article stated that reporters “could not independently corroborate Ms. Fifield’s account of the altercations”. (Fifield has complained they didn’t try hard enough.)

While the article spooked some Platner supporters, others were quick to........

© The Guardian