In a nutshell, one can see the bias here if one looks at how the media
treated Anita Hill and how Paula Jones is
treated. One example:
On Jones, Alter declared: "She's obviously a footnote to
history now. But she also, when there's summary judgment, that's
another way of saying 'You're a nuisance.' That's what summary
judgment means, that it's a nuisance lawsuit, a frivolous
lawsuit. She's been a professional litigant for the last five
years, so now she'll have to get on and get a life. She has shown
an interest in acting. Doubtful that the Royal Shakespeare
Company will be seeking her services, but she might get a guest
spot or something like that on [the redneck sitcom of Jeff]
Foxworthy. That's about what her future holds."
On Starr: "Thumbs down for him. It really makes his job a lot
more difficult. What is he gonna do? Subpoena Judge Wright and
charge her with obstruction of justice because she's gotten in
his way? I think he should be winding down investigation, putting
his cards on the table. If he doesn't come forward very soon with
credible evidence of lawbreaking, he will go down in history as
the Peeping Tom prosecutor."
Compare those condemnations to what Alter penned in the
October 21, 1991 Newsweek:
Appearing on MSNBC's The News with Brian Williams on
April 1, 1998, Newsweek's resident "conventional wisdom" creator
Jonathan Alter delivered his spin on the fallout of the Jones
dismissal. The MRC's Tim Graham took down his comments and found
they offered quite a contrast to how Alter assessed Anita Hill
and Clarence Thomas in 1991.
"C. Thomas (down arrow): He's lying (Isn't he?) Effective
denials, but stop crying racism."
"A. Hill (up arrow): She's a brave truth teller (Isn't she?)
Her details, lack of motive tip the balance."