The focus of the article is on the current trend to report on election news — including debate coverage — not on the substance and context of what is being said, but in how it will "play" with the electorate, how it might affect the polls, how it adds to (in Clinton's case) the asserted "perception" of her being untrustworthy or secretive or in cahoots with Wall Street.
Substance is ignored in favor of optics, especially optics enforcing optics that are already taken as established by the press. "Will people think this makes her look worse?" regardless of what "this" is, or whether it should make her look "worse" in some canned fashion. And this holds true, not just amongst crews like Fox News, but (as in this case) with the New York Times, et al.
Given how Trump has taken a shellacking in the news this past week-plus, the argument might seem silly. But that's about actual actions, past and present, on his part, and people hearing and interpreting them themselves (those tapes have gotten far more traction than any of an endless list of people having accused him of similar behavior in the past has). An approach where each new story about Clinton is not examined on its own merits, but on how it fits into a "public perception" or "narrative" of her avoids the hard work of fact-checking and investigation, and helps turn that hypothesized "perception" into accepted reality.
In Opinion: Why is the press ganging up on Clinton?
Why does the press not challenge the conventional wisdom that Clinton is untrustworthy?
Umm, +Dave Hill? Our useless press has always reduced politics to Horse Race and "how does it play to average Americans" since at least St. Ronnie of the Raygun.
Our useless press is incapable of actually doing reporting, sadly that is what comedy shows are for now.
From my perspective the 1%'ers that spoon feed us our political pablum are barely more then stenographers and will gleefully parrot up whatever line is fed to them (i.e. what has come out of the DNC and Clinton camp email leaks).
And no, she's had it really easy for the entire election so far since she's spent the past 8 years becoming friends with the press, add to that the 1%'ers in the press do not want Trump to win, so they suppress or ignore anything of real damage to her.