The media's selective memory is on full display in Michigan, where Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed is getting a pass for his cozy relationship with a far-left streamer, even as the same outlets would be screaming bloody murder if a Republican had done the same.
El-Sayed, who won the Democratic primary, is now trying to create the illusion of separation from Hasan Piker, a Twitch personality whose greatest hits include praising Hamas, mocking the 9/11 attacks, and suggesting that the murder of a healthcare CEO was justified. But El-Sayed has not actually condemned Piker or disavowed his views—he's just saying he has "no plans" to campaign with him again, while dismissing the controversy as a distraction about "a streamer in California."
This is a classic political dodge, and it's working because the media are letting him get away with it. The Associated Press, The Guardian, Semafor, and Politico have all run stories describing El-Sayed as "distancing" himself from Piker, without noting that he has never actually repudiated the streamer or his rhetoric. As El-Sayed's Piker problem deepens, the coverage has become a masterclass in journalistic inconsistency.
The irony is rich. The same outlets that have spent years warning about the radicalization of the Republican Party are now bending over backward to give a Democratic candidate the benefit of the doubt. El-Sayed has said he's "not here to disavow people's views," and he's framed criticism of Piker as a "massive effort to cancel Hasan." That's not distancing—that's defending.
El-Sayed's relationship with Piker was not a secret. They appeared together at multiple events, and El-Sayed once called it "critical" for Democrats to engage with Piker's audience. Now that the broader electorate has noticed Piker's odious character, El-Sayed wants voters to believe he's somehow separate from it all. But as Piker's role in El-Sayed's bid sparks debate, the candidate's attempts to rewrite history are becoming harder to swallow.
The media's willingness to adopt El-Sayed's framing is a disservice to voters. The AP went so far as to suggest that El-Sayed's comments "may have cooled the relationship," without any evidence. The Guardian declared that El-Sayed had "distanced himself" from Piker, and Semafor claimed he had "put more distance" between himself and the streamer. But none of these outlets have acknowledged the obvious: El-Sayed has never actually condemned Piker.
This is not a matter of partisan gotcha. It's about accountability. If a Republican candidate had been photographed with a figure who praised Hamas and mocked 9/11, the media would be demanding a full-throated denunciation. But because El-Sayed is a Democrat, the standards are apparently different. As media figures who shielded Biden now question Trump's fitness, the double standard is hard to ignore.
El-Sayed's campaign has tried to change the subject, insisting that voters care about real issues, not a "Twitch streamer in California." But he's the one who brought Piker into the fold. He's the one who stood beside him and called for engagement with his audience. Now he wants to pretend it never happened.
The truth is that El-Sayed's "distancing" is a sham, and the media are complicit. They are helping him create the false impression that he has broken with the far-left fringe, when in reality he is simply waiting for the controversy to blow over. Voters deserve better—from both the candidate and the press.
