Somebody call the wahmbulance, please.

The New York Times did an article on former White House comms director Hope Hicks Friday, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY-14) and her journo pal Soledad O’Brien are most definitely not pleased.

Why? Because the article did two things: Presented the Congressional subpoena for Hicks as though complying with it was optional, rather than being mandatory – and because the photo the New York Times used for the piece showed Hicks in a favorable light:

Hope Hicks, one of the best-known but least visible former members of President Trump’s White House staff, is facing an existential question: whether to comply with a congressional subpoena https://t.co/8NXpfQvxQL pic.twitter.com/L7aWVMsIdq — NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) May 24, 2019

A catty O’Brien characterized the photo as a “glam shot”:

This is a good example of bias in the @nytimes: a picture of a person who is considering not complying with a subpoena is basically a glam shot, and it’s framed as a thoughtful, perfectly equal choice. https://t.co/qRHT31AsMg — Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) May 26, 2019

O’Brien continued her rant later, saying the NYT – a paper that is famous for their open hostility towards Republicans – gave the feature piece the “glamour girl treatment”:

Exactly.

So let’s ask ourselves—why was this fairly useless article (read it and you’ll agree) about Hope Hicks, given the glamour girl treatment?

What could it be?

Why would someone want to write a puff piece about her?

Framed—not from a legal perspective—but from her pov?

Hmm. https://t.co/U3lmnx2Kez — Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) May 26, 2019

An equally catty Ocasio-Cortez was late to the party, of course, but in predictable fashion, she joined in by characterizing the article as “glamour shot time”:

Yup. Where’s the “no angel” take now? In the immediate aftermath of shootings, media routinely post menacing photos of people-of-color victims + dredge up any questionable thing they’d ever done. But when Hope Hicks considers not complying w a subpoena, it’s glamour shot time. https://t.co/ACnvXlKF7Q — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) May 26, 2019

Later, she demanded the paper “treat her equally”:

What gets me is news breaks that this woman is weighing committing a crime before Congress &it’s getting framed by the NYT as some Lifetime drama called “Hope’s Choice.” This is a fmr admin official considering participating in a coverup led by the President. Treat her equally. https://t.co/XcNbSuU4QB — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) May 26, 2019

“Treat her equally” to who? Someone accused of murder?

O’Brien later retweeted these two tweets:

The next time a Black man decides not to comply with a subpoena, I want @nytimes to do a fucking glamour shot piece on him that highlights his existential angst https://t.co/m05Z3FQllE — Desiree Adaway (@desireeadaway) May 26, 2019

There is nothing for Hope Hicks to “decide.” She got a subpoena from Congress. Were she not white, wealthy, and connected, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. She would appear, or she would face the threat of prison like the rest of us. As she should. https://t.co/giDCcvIxvf — Jamil Smith (@JamilSmith) May 26, 2019

Presumably, none of the liberals pitching a fit about “white privilege” when it comes to subpoena decisions have ever heard of a guy named Eric Holder.

But back to the photo: If this gang of clueless wonders had kept their criticisms of the piece to how the paper presented Hicks’s subpoena compliance as a choice, that would have been a fair critique. But they also went after the picture the paper used. Presumably the paper should have used one that showed Hicks, who has classically beautiful features, in a menacing light?

Let’s flip the switch here: If this had been a conservative female journalist and a female Republican legislator slamming a newspaper for using a flattering photo of a female Democrat facing a subpoena, they would have been blasted by other mainstream news outlets, liberal commentators, and media critics as being petty and backwards-thinking.

But because we’re talking about liberal Democrats complaining about the “glam shot” portrayal of a Republican woman, all of a sudden we have A Very Big Issue™ that needs to urgently be addressed.

Might Hicks be getting glam shots and kid-glove treatment because she's been a (good) source for White House reporters? Just asking. https://t.co/5nZq5ekpc8 — Stuart Elliott (@stuartenyt) May 27, 2019

Now if Ocasio-Cortez and O’Brien were against media outlets doing “glamour shots” as a general rule – no matter the type of coverage, I’d be all for it. But they’re not, you see. As long as the flattering photos are of them:

This is a small-big thing, but shout out to TIME and Collier Schorr for getting my skin tone right in this photo. ⭐️ It’s the little things that make a big difference, a lot of people see + appreciate it https://t.co/hGWZFLCvs3 — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 21, 2019

AOC is on the cover of this week's @TIME. @CharlotteAlter describes her as "the second most talked-about politician in America…" pic.twitter.com/UgWdDqbLJ6 — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) March 21, 2019

My latest Magazine Cover design for USA Today's Modern Woman Mag featuring Soledad O'Brien. #usatoday #soledadzbrien pic.twitter.com/BdjHNo0eEU — Council Magazine (@CouncilMagazine) October 31, 2015

Next “issue”, please?

————————-

—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–