This is funny. A reader named “AR” wrote Talking Points Memo about the New York Times’ fondness for the words shadows and clouds in coverage of the campaign of Hillary Clinton.

“Like many people, I’ve been bothered by an ominous, insinuating tone in the NYT’s Clinton coverage. HRC always seems to be inhabiting a gloomy, almost Tolkienesque realm of cloud and shadow. The latest Weiner story gave me a strong sense of deja vu, so I went searching for instances of “cloud(s)” and “shadow(s)” in stories from the past few months.”

AR found 20 articles since early May using “clouds” or “shadows” as the de rigueur metaphor of choice. (To be fair, three of the examples are Associated Press stories the Times ran.)

The references are listed. The most recent and outrageous was the Times headline, “Weiner’s Texts Cast Shadow on Campaign.” Anthony Weiner has no role in the Clinton campaign. His wife does. His underwear-clad texting to a woman has led to separation from his wife, who does work for Clinton.  That was the story. NYT led with perceived shadow on Clinton. I’d write:

Headline casts shadow on NYT

or

Clintonphobia clouds NYT judgment