Maine Democrats should blame themselves for choosing Graham Platner as their candidate despite all the obvious red flags, but there is no doubt that Platner's rise to prominence and his ability to raise gobs of money to present himself as a viable candidate is almost solely due to the fact that The New York Times put him on the map before he got into the race and worked mightily to maintain his viability despite the growing number of scandals.
I have written before about how the myth of Graham Platner's "working man" populism was created, despite the fact that he was a child of privilege, lied constantly about his background and even his "job" as an oysterman. He was a creation of a propaganda machine, primarily driven by The New York Times and the Condé Nast media empire.
National Review did a deep dive into how Platner was plucked out of nowhere and turned into a working-class political star.
The phrase “it’s an op” – meaning an influence operation – is often, though not always, a marker of paranoia, a tendency towards conspiracy theories, or a belief in forces that are unseen and cannot yet be proven to exist.
Still, from the very start of SS-tattooed Democrat Graham Platner’s campaign for Senate, something seemed odd. The New York Times is not in the habit of writing a largely glowing profile of every long-shot, little-known Democrat who announces a bid for Senate. Platner was the harbormaster of Sullivan, Maine, population 1,246.
Yet the Times wrote its profile of Platner before he officially announced his campaign, in August.
In September, The New Yorker wrote its own 3,400-word profile of Platner, emphasizing how he “devoured books on military history.” (But remember, he insists he never recognized the tattoo on his chest as a symbol of the Nazi SS.) Again, The New Yorker almost never writes long-detailed profiles of little-known Democratic Senate candidates one month after they announce their bid.
Then in October, GQ – not primarily a political magazine, and not one that often spotlights candidates – published its own large spread of Platner with lots of photos.
Then in November, the culinary magazine Bon Appetit – again, not in the habit of covering obscure Senate candidates – wrote another glowing profile, this one entitled, “How Graham Platner Went From Working-Class Oysterman to Maine’s Zohran Mamdani.”
This is Beto O’Rourke-level national coverage, right out of the gate
We can speculate all we want about why they chose to go down this path, but there is no question that these major Pravda Media outlets gave their stamp of approval to Platner's campaign, helping him raise $16 million as of May 20th and undoubtedly millions more since. That never would have happened without the Times creating and backing him.
It's worth re-visiting this fawning NYT profile of Platner in light of the concrete evidence that they intentionally buried rape allegations against him prior to the primary.
— Steve Robinson (@SteveRob) July 7, 2026
Let's count the lies...
"Graham Platner shucking oysters at the farm he co-runs in the Frenchman Bay in… pic.twitter.com/nsCNzboMQ1
It's worth re-visiting this fawning NYT profile of Platner in light of the concrete evidence that they intentionally buried rape allegations against him prior to the primary.
Let's count the lies...
"Graham Platner shucking oysters at the farm he co-runs in the Frenchman Bay in Maine." That's a lie. He doesn't co-run anything; he's a solo oyster hobbyist. He buys oysters that are ready for market, puts them in cages for a season, then sells them to his mom. He's done roughly $5,000 in revenue (gross) in his 5th year of operation.
"serves as the local harbor master" This is a $3,000 per year gig on a committee that meets a handful of times per year.
"A competitive pistol shooter" He started and led the Socialist Rifle Association chapter in Maine, a far left paramilitary group.
"An untested candidate like Mr. Platner may be a risky bet..." Well I guess she got that part right
"Mr. Platner, whose light social media footprint" lol does Reddit not count?
https://nytimes.com/2025/08/19/us/politics/maine-senate-candidate-collins.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
As has become clear, the Times' story about the original accusations of assault against a girlfriend turned out to be a "catch and kill" operation—in this case a "modified limited hangout," in which snippets of a damaging story are put out there and minimized as a nothingburger, in order to hide the most damaging facts behind a smokescreen.
It worked. They made it look like a Republican hit job, and the rest of the media picked that up and ran with it, helping Platner raise MORE money after the story broke.
How do we know for sure that the Times willingly participated in the cover-up? It sent reporters out to downplay the story and make it seem benign, even "consensual."
Jodi Kantor was in full possession of the allegations when she gave this interview. She knew Lyndsey Fifield alleged domestic violence & stalking. She knew Jenny Racicot alleged rape. The victims took great personal risk to expose the truth. This is how the truth was treated: https://t.co/H7OXVwjXKr pic.twitter.com/I8T61nun97
— Magdi Jacobs (@magi_jay) July 7, 2026
The Times had all the evidence, including an off-the-record description of the rape of which he is now publicly accused. They even described it in the most benign terms. Rather than even hinting that there was a serious problem, they described Racicot's relationship this way:
Jenny Racicot, 41, a Maine Democrat, who said she dated him casually off and on between 2019 and 2021, said the posts deepened her belief that he did not respect women. “When I saw the old comments that he made online,” she said, “I recognized a version of him that I had experiences with.”
That's it. They turned a rape into that. No doubt one of the old comments she was referring to was Platner's blaming rape victims for being responsible for their being assaulted.
"She made me do it." Classic DARVO, which means "Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender." He's doing it now.
When you watch that video, remember that Jodi Kantor had all the facts at her disposal, and she made it sound as though Platner was a less-than-exemplary boyfriend at worst.
Anatomy of a Hype Job: How the New York Times Boosted Graham Platner @IraStoll @FreeBeacon https://t.co/vcUvxFkb9m
— Matthew Continetti (@continetti) July 8, 2026
I can't say the why, but we all can see the what of all this. Platner was a creation of The New York Times. They may not have picked him—those annoying freaks at the DSA did—but they turned him into a political star and backed him all the way.
This may get very ugly for @nytimes
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) July 7, 2026
A victim of sexual misconduct (at a minimum) by Graham Platner explains in detail how she provided the Times the evidence it could have used to corroborate her story - and how the Times ignored it
This is deep journalistic malfeasance https://t.co/2d9d3IPKgv
Lyndsey Fifield and Jenny Racicot have both shown that the Times had all the evidence at their disposal, and chose to downplay the story and spin the facts to benefit Platner. And despite this being true and out in the open, nobody at the Times has responded to explain their "reporting."
Outside of conservative circles and a few independent media outlets, there is no clamor for explanations from the Times. None of their media colleagues are pressing them about their egregious failure to tell the truth. The reporters involved will remain prestigious and at the top of their profession. The Times will remain the "newspaper of record."
"After we spoke to her, she came forward with explosive allegations." NYT Author of "Catch and Kill" piece downplaying what the Times new about Platner. "She spoke to us on the record. But she also spoke to us off the record, and we honored that agreement. She told Politico..." pic.twitter.com/hrBafrBFiB
— Eric W. (@EWess92) July 8, 2026
"She didn't go public with the specific assault at the time." But perhaps she told the Times off the record! The interesting exchange begins about 3:40 in. https://t.co/MwTlcm7eqa
— Eric W. (@EWess92) July 8, 2026
The Times ran with and defended their "Israeli rape dogs" story, despite the accusation being absurd and coming from literal terrorists. Yet they do backflips to hide credible accusations of rape, and slander a Republican former girlfriend by saying, incorrectly, that there was no corroborating evidence for her accusations.
Will this "scandal" damage the Times? Not with liberals or their media colleagues, whose only regret was that it seems they couldn't maintain the Platner momentum.
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy HotAir's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join HotAir VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member