Why does Hillary "mis-speak" instead of lie?

Journalists have the reputation of never leaving any incriminating details out of a story, especially when it comes to politicians. Every bit of dirt is sought after, publicized, and written about in less than glorifying terms – such is the relationship between the journalist and the candidate, where anything and everything is considered newsworthy. Yet, in most instances journalists shy away from the most basic and cutting accusation; one almost never sees in a newspaper a statement that a candidate lied about something. It is heavily implied, but never actually written. Why is this? Why is there a line that political journalists will not cross?

Take, for example, the recent news that Hillary Clinton “misspoke” about her trip to Bosnia in 1996. Clinton, in recalling her trip, said that she had to run inside the airport with her head down through sniper fire. Almost immediately, footage of the visit showed Clinton being greeted outside by ambassadors and children. In addition, every other person on the trip denied any danger at all. Clearly, Clinton lied and fabricated her story about the visit. Journalists covered the story left and right, yet it was merely said that Clinton “misspoke.”

Why is it that the journalists who scathingly write about Clinton other times only strongly implied that Clinton lied without actually saying it? I think it can be tied in to a problem that many candidates have. A political candidate often will leave accusatory comments to outside sources so his or her own reputation will not be sullied. It allows the message to get out yet also keep the candidate removed and seen as above making such comments. This might be the case with journalists. There is something significant about the word “lie” that most people cringe at. When someone is accused of lying, it brings into question his or her character and leads the public to believe that the person is unable to be trusted. Mistrust makes everyone uncomfortable because presuppositions about that person’s character are thrown out the window. When the person is a political candidate, mistrust is almost always a death sentence. The fact that the stakes are so high might be why journalists retreat from calling a politician a liar.

Another reason might be that the public would take such a statement and begin to mistrust the media. Most people already believe that the media is biased toward either conservatives or liberals or that media writes stories for economic gain. All three of these perspectives would only be increased if journalists began writing about lying politicians. It could be more harmful for the candidate for the media to continue talking about Clinton’s mistake in telling her story than to downright call her a liar.