WaPo’s boner: Pelosi’s husband attacked but his DUI matters more?

Early readers of the WaPo’s coverage of the attack on Paul Pelosi learned more about his DUI conviction.

News hounds scanning the headlines Friday morning were greeted by the shocking news that the husband of U.S. House Majority leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) was violently attacked in the couple’s San Francisco home.

What might’ve shocked them even more, though, was the Washington Post’s breaking coverage by Eugene Scott, that included two paragraphs on a misdemeanor DUI Paul Pelosi pled guilty to in August — one quarter of the story’s length.

Missing was any context that Rep. Pelosi has been the subject of many death threats especially since Jan. 6, when violent insurgents at the U.S. Capitol made clear their intentions to attack her. One infamous photo showed an insurgent, an Arkansas man since arrested and awaiting trial on a number of charges, with his feet on the speaker’s desk.

Reaction to the Post’s piece was swift. Comments ran the gamut from “There is more info in this article about his DUI than the assault. Relevance to the assault?” to “Gee, I’m going to post an unusual observation: I hope Paul Pelosi was not injured in the attack.”

The overriding sentiment of many shocked by the article was reflected in this comment: “Why is the DUI and what business he owns in this article? Totally irrelevant. This break in and vicious attack of an 82 year old man, is sickening. Full stop.”

As of 10:41 a.m. Eastern time, the article (with additional coverage by Leigh Ann Caldwell) had been revised to include mention of pig’s head spray painted on the Pelosi home in January and a reaction from Senate Majority leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), but still included prominent mention of Paul Pelosi’s DUI.

It was, as of that time, the Post’s most-read article.

Lou Carlozzo