Vogue editor and top Hillary Clinton fundraiser Anna Wintour attended the New York Times page one meeting on Wednesday, amid criticism of the paper’s coverage of the Democratic frontrunner.
The Times has defended its reporting on Clinton in recent weeks, after the candidate’s supporters accused the paper of pushing an anti-Clinton bias.
Multiple Times editors remarked on Wintour’s attendance at the news meeting on Twitter.
"Spotted at @nytimes page one meeting today: Anna Wintour. Sunglasses on throughout. Said very little, yet so much," wrote senior politics editor Carolyn Ryan, the former Washington bureau chief who has been the subject of criticism by Clinton allies.
Michael Luo, the Times’ deputy metro editor, wrote on Twitter, ".@annawintour at the 9:30 a.m. @nytimes news meeting! Unusual self-consciousness abt attire this morning in the room."
Wintour is one of Clinton’s most prominent celebrity supporters and has reportedly co-hosted two major fundraisers for her in the Hamptons and Paris over the past couple months.
The Vogue editor is also scheduled to host another Clinton fundraiser with movie mogul Harvey Weinstein at Vera Wang’s Manhattan apartment on Oct. 25, according to Page Six.
A spokesperson for the Times did not respond to request for comment on why Wintour was at the meeting. Ryan wrote on Twitter that, "Guests are pretty frequent" at the meetings and "lots of visiting journalists sit in."
While the Times has broken some of the most explosive stories about Clinton of the election cycle—including the news about her private email server—Thursday’s edition featured flattering coverage of the candidate above the front-page fold.
"In Debate, Clinton Sent a Message to Doubters," read the headline for an article about Clinton’s Tuesday debate performance.
The Times reported that Democrats "expressed growing skepticism on Wednesday that Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. could find a foothold if he entered the presidential campaign" due to Clinton’s "commanding performance" at the debate.
The paper has rebuffed claims from Clinton backers that it is unfairly targeting the candidate.
"As it concerns Clinton coverage, the Times will have a special place in hell," wrote Democratic activist David Brock in his latest book Killing the Messenger.
Brock, who runs the pro-Hillary PAC Correct the Record, claimed former Washington bureau chief Ryan was responsible for the paper’s supposedly anti-Clinton stance and had turned the Times into a "megaphone for conservative propaganda."
A spokesperson for the Times dismissed the criticism, telling Politico last month that Brock was "an opportunist and a partisan who specializes in personal attacks."
Ryan was replaced as bureau chief by Elisabeth Bumiller last month, and now oversees the paper’s political coverage.
The criticism has also seemed to vex executive editor Dean Baquet in recent weeks.
"I think if you add all that up, and add up the daily coverage of her, we're not unfair," Baquet told CNN on Sunday. "You have to look at the full picture. And you have to look at the fact that when we screw up, we own up to it."
Baquet also recently insisted to the Daily Beast that there was "no institutional animus toward the Clintons" at the paper.