Since the story broke in mid-May, the Graham Platner saga has widened from a candidate controversy into a media accountability story — and that second thread is now running just as hot as the first.

The NYT's Buried Lede Problem Is Getting Worse

The New York Times published its multi-source piece on Platner's ex-girlfriends last Thursday. The piece ran well over 2,000 words.

Here's what the Times put near the top: quotes from women who described Platner as "a fun and caring partner" and said they "felt safe with him."

Here's what the Times buried:

• The allegation that Platner twisted Lyndsey Fifield's arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom, and held the door shut — not until paragraph 22, according to the Daily Signal's Tony Kinnett.
• The allegation that Platner said repeatedly, "If anybody ever broke in here, I would rape them" — not until roughly 1,300 words in, per Daily Signal editor Katrina Trinko's analysis published June 5.
• The confirmation from Fifield that Platner knew his tattoo was a Nazi symbol — buried past 500 words.

This isn't a rookie mistake. Every journalism student learns the inverted pyramid on day one: most important facts go first. The Times has hundreds of experienced editors. These were deliberate choices.

The headline the Times chose: "Several Women Who Dated Graham Platner Recall 'Unsettling' Behavior."

"Unsettling" is what you call a guy who double-books dinner plans. Twisting a woman's arm hard enough that "it hurt" while locking her in a room is physical abuse. Those are not the same thing, and the Times knows it.

Fifield Says the Coverage Was a 'Gift' to Platner

Fifield — who dated Platner on and off from 2013 to 2015 — has been explicit about her reaction to how her story was handled. According to Fox News, she described the Times' coverage as a "gift" to Platner's campaign, not a threat to it.

She posted publicly after the piece ran: "Anyone who has ever extracted themselves from a relationship with a narcissistic abuser knows it isn't clean or easy."

She added that she had "cringed" remembering how many times she "tried to play the cool girl or fawn in response to what was clearly abusive, coercively controlling behavior."

Those are not the words of someone who felt the Times told her story.

A Biden Accuser Says She Recognizes the Pattern

Fox News is reporting that a woman who accused Joe Biden of similar conduct says she had a nearly identical experience with the same New York Times reporter involved in the Platner coverage — alleging her account was softened, reframed, or deprioritized in ways that served the political figure she was accusing.

Two accusers. Two Democrats. One reporter. Same complaint.

The Times has not responded publicly to the parallel allegation.

Kyle Kulinski's Defense Is Falling Apart Under Scrutiny

Left-wing podcaster Kyle Kulinski went on video this week calling liberals who criticized Platner "fucking traitors" and "useful idiots" for Donald Trump, according to Breitbart. He dismissed Fifield's account specifically because she is a conservative, calling her a "literal Republican operative" and saying Platner's "biggest crime is dating a creature as loathsome as a Republican."

A woman alleges physical abuse. The response from Platner's defenders is: she's a Republican, so it doesn't count.

Fifield worked for years at the Daily Signal. She is a conservative. She is also a person. Those two facts coexist without contradiction, and her political affiliation has zero bearing on whether Platner grabbed her hard enough to leave marks.

The Numbers Before the Worst Came Out

Polling from Fabrizio Lee, released Wednesday and reported by Breitbart, showed Platner tied with incumbent Sen. Susan Collins at 46 percent each — a dramatic collapse from his earlier lead.

The favorability swing is more telling. In January, Platner was six points above water: 35 percent favorable, 29 percent unfavorable. By this week, he's nine points underwater: 40 percent favorable, 49 percent unfavorable. That's a 15-point net swing in roughly five months.

Critically, this survey was completed before the Times published the abuse allegations Thursday night. The next round of polling will be worse.

What Mainstream Coverage Is Missing

Most mainstream outlets that have covered the Platner story have focused on the candidate. But the second story — how the Times handled two separate women making similar complaints about two separate prominent Democrats, and appears to have softened both — is being almost entirely ignored by left-leaning outlets.

CNN has not run a segment on the Times' editorial choices in this piece. MSNBC has not examined why the most explosive allegation ran in paragraph 22. That is a media accountability story that has nothing to do with rooting for one party.

Journalism norms are not partisan. Either you put the most important facts first or you don't. The Times didn't.

What This Means

If you're a voter in Maine, you now have two accusers on record saying the same media outlet handled their stories in ways that protected the men they were accusing. You have a candidate whose favorability has dropped 15 net points and is now tied in a race he was supposed to win. You have physical abuse allegations that his own defenders dismiss based on the victim's political identity.

The primary is weeks away. Maine voters are paying attention. Whether the national press does the same job they expect local reporters to do remains to be seen.