Lyndsey Fifield, a former girlfriend of Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner, is publicly criticizing The New York Times, accusing the newspaper of downplaying her allegations against the Democrat and providing what she described as a political advantage to his campaign.
After speaking with the outlet about her claims that Platner was a “narcissistic abuser,” Fifield said the newspaper omitted key information, including screenshots, supporting evidence, and testimony from multiple individuals she says could have corroborated her account.
In a post on X, Fifield questioned why the article stated that her allegations could not be corroborated when she had allegedly provided sources willing to support her claims.
“Why does it say ‘nobody could corroborate’ when I offered them sources that COULD corroborate?” she wrote.
According to Fifield, The New York Times also chose not to include screenshots and other materials she had provided during the reporting process. She further claimed editors left out details regarding her own political background, including her support for local Democrats and the fact that most of her family members, as well as her husband, hold liberal political views.
Fifield argued that this information was important because it would have undermined any suggestion that her allegations were politically motivated. Apparently, in modern journalism, some facts are considered more newsworthy than others.
She also stated that she had spoken about Platner’s alleged behavior with several friends over the years, long before he entered politics, and claimed those friends confirmed her account to the newspaper. According to Fifield, that information was also excluded from the final story.
In addition, Fifield alleged that while Platner never struck or punched her, there were incidents she considered physical in nature, including an occasion when she says he grabbed her wrist and forcefully pulled her out of a taxi during an argument.
Platner has denied any physical abuse allegations.
The dispute has raised fresh questions about how major media organizations handle politically sensitive stories, particularly when allegations involve Democratic candidates. As the controversy continues, voters will ultimately decide which voices they trust and what standards they expect from both candidates and the media that covers them.
