It was a cold, damp night, not the sort of weather to make anyone sit outside for more than two and a half hours, let alone a 96-year-old who has been having is

After four years of magazine covers disparaging former President Donald Trump, Time magazine has offered up extremely glowing covers of President Joe Biden. The most recent cover of Time magazine features a flattering illustration of President Biden, which many online commenters ridiculed for being “sycophantic.”

Last year, Time was roasted for making Joe Biden and Kamala Harris the magazine’s “Person of the Year.” Last November, Time celebrated Biden’s presidential victory by calling him a “dragon slayer,” saying that his election represented a “time to heal.”

Time continued its highly favorable coverage of President Biden with a new cover that was so over-the-top praiseworthy that it was widely mocked online.

President Biden will meet up with Russian President Vladimir Putin on June 16 in Geneva, Switzerland. Ahead of the summit, Time’s latest edition features an illustration of Biden wearing his signature aviator sunglasses, which have the reflection of Putin in the lenses. Biden seemingly appears to be champing at the bit to engage with his Russian counterpart. The headline on the cover says, “Taking on Putin.”

The image of the 78-year-old Biden makes him appear years younger with zero wrinkles and taut skin.

— TIME (@TIME)

Several Twitter reactions put a spotlight on Biden waiving sanctions against the company that is building the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline from Russia into Germany. The pipeline would enable Russia to bypass Ukraine and freely flow natural gas into Europe. Previously, the Trump administration attempted to hinder the development of the pipeline so that Europe would purchase gas from the United States.

Former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell reacted by saying, “Giving him a pipeline of leverage into Europe is NOT taking him on. It’s giving in.”

Cliff Sims, a former senior adviser to the DNI, said, “Yea, Putin is quivering in his boots after Biden handed him his number one geopolitical infrastructure project on a platter so he can work with the Germans on climate change. What a joke.”

Washington Examiner writer Jerry Dunleavy wrote, “Biden takes on [the Republicans, Democrats, Eastern European allies, Ukrainians, etc. who opposed the corrupt Kremlin-backed Nord Stream 2 pipeline which every honest person knows is a malign influence operation which will ultimately benefit] Putin.”

“If by taking Putin on you mean allowing him to build his massive pipeline while shutting ours down,” one Twitter user wrote.

National Review’s Kyle Smith tweeted, “DNC press releases aren’t this sycophantic.”

An online commenter asked, “What in the hell kind of fan fiction comic book is this cover?”

One person stated, “TIME has to use photoshop to show Biden younger than Putin. Is this ‘takes on?'”

Multiple Twitter users joked that “Biden can’t even take on stairs, let alone Putin,” referencing the time President Biden stumbled down the stairs leading up to Air Force One.

Young America’s Foundation lampooned the laudatory press coverage of the Democratic president, “tHe MeDiA dOeSn’T PiCk SiDeS.”

Real Clear Politics co-founder Tom Bevan showed the stark difference between Time magazine’s gushing cover of Biden and a cover of Trump’s face blended with Putin’s.

— Tom Bevan (@Tom Bevan)

A year and a half ago when Vice President Kamala Harris was gunning for the Democratic presidential nomination, the Washington Post published a story looking at her close relationship with her sister Maya that contained what some might call a disturbing anecdote.

What are the details?

In short, Harris likened the effects of the fast pace and long days and nights of the campaign trail to how a desperate, overwhelmed prisoner might feel begging for food and water. Here’s how the first seven paragraphs of story read when it was originally published on July 23, 2019, Reason reported:

Yup, she laughed. At her own ill-advised joke. Not the best look.

Kamala Harris Laughing Compilation

youtu.be

And Reason noted the effectiveness of the Post’s story:

At the time, Harris was fair game like all the other Democratic hopefuls wanting a shot at the White House. Indeed, she was an early front-runner, which made her an even bigger target for the media. But less than five months after the Post’s profile ran, Harris dropped out of the race as he poll numbers plummeted and the staff departed.

Oh my how things have changed in two years

Reason took a look again at the Post’s 2019 story — and discovered that, lo and behold, Harris’ cringeworthy joke was gone.

Turns out the paper put together an online series prior to the inauguration, and when Reason asked the Post’s communications manager why the story was changed, the outlet said it got this response: “We repurposed and updated some of our strong biographical pieces about both political figures” and the story in question “was updated with new reporting, as noted online, using the existing URL. The original story remains available in print.”

What’s more, it appears the Post did some fast fixing.

Reason’s story about the Post doing a “memory-hole” number was published at 10:25 a.m. Friday. But in an new update note, Reason told its readers that as of 1:15 p.m. the Post had “updated its website and URLs to restore the original version of the Kamala Harris profile.”

Sure, the repurposed story dated Jan. 11 without Harris’ anecdote is still there — but a number of other links that Reason said redirected users to the sanitized Harris story were restored so that they now go to the original.

“We should have kept both versions of the story on the Post’s site (the original and updated one), rather than redirecting to the updated version,” Kris Coratti, the Post’s vice president for communications, told Reason on Friday. “We have now done that, and you will see the link to the original at the top of the updated version.”

Anything else?

Reason had an inkling of what may have been at the heart of things:

Eric Boehm, author the Reason piece, added that “at a time when legacy publications are increasingly seen as playing for one political ‘team’ or the other, this type of editorial decision will not do anything to fix that perception — is there any doubt that the Post would not have treated an inartful comment from Mike Pence in the same way?”

“Intentional or not, the memory-holing of the older version of the piece sends a message that the
Post is willing to pave over its own good journalism to protect a powerful politician from her own words,” he concluded.