who instinctively attack other outlets who scoop them right?

like the way they circled the wagons to discredit outlets like buzzfeed multiple times for trump/russia/barr/etc stories but rush to defend haberman, peter baker, etc.

where was this nytimes dude when nytimes reporter michael schmidt held on to several important scoops for his recent book?

like the trump walter reed hospital visit being so serious that pence had to be placed on standby?
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1300599297721937927

or the mueller investigation being secretly/intentionally curtailed by rosenstein to prevent mueller from exploring trumps financial ties russia?
https://twitter.com/nytmike/status/1300085848596262912

now those stories are now past the point where people even care about them. but they could have done a lot of good if the public was knowledgeable when schmidt actually got hold of the scoop.

this woodward story still has the potential to do more good than any of the schmidt shit he held in the chamber.

they can spare me the selective outrage.