THE lEFT IS THE rIGHT:

Sanders' reversal on health records--just last fall he had pledged that he would "certainly" release "comprehensive" health information before votes were cast--is notable in at least three respects.

One, it shows how pervasive the Trump precedent is. Even politicians who stand against him on every issue, and who speak solemnly about the need to restore norms shattered during this presidency, are ready to follow trails he has blazed in taking flight from public accountability.

Two, the Sanders' evasion highlights the dilution of mainstream media's institutional power. There has been no aspirant or occupant of the White House during the modern presidency who has not wished to say go to hell to uncomfortable inquiries about health, finances, or aspects of personal lives that affect public duties. Trump and Sanders are hardly the first to do so. But the reason most politicians historically have refrained from the impulse is that it came with a high cost: It was unpleasant and politically expensive to be in the cross-hairs of the New York Times, the Washington Post, or a major broadcast network like NBC.

Three, the episode highlights how little public comprehension there is of the historic shift in political culture away from transparency, accountability, and the traditional levers used to enforce both. In an earlier generation, editors at major news institutions possessed enormous power--through their story selection and story framing--to summon sustained national attention on subjects they deemed important.

On both left and right, a lot of media criticism is based on the assumption--a fantasy, actually--that this editorial power exists in the same fashion it did three or four decades ago. 

Tweet   @brothersjudd