The Clintons are the definition of old news, the family's been in the national spotlight since Bill gave the keynote speech in 1988 and became a serious candidate for the 1992 election. After a quarter of a century in the political limelight, and with the prospect of another decade of them at the forefront of American politics, can you blame the press for wanting to talk about someone else?
This generation of the Clinton family is well past its sell-by date. Its coming of age narrative includes stories about Vietnam draft dodging, civil rights, the 1964 and 1972 elections, and the counterculture. The Clintons are part of the AARP crowd now and so are their generational compatriots, and presumably especially new media journalistic types want someone considerably easier to relate to for us post-1960s culture war types. Maybe a candidate whose biopic doesn't inevitably play "Blowing in the Wind" while zooming out on a blurry photo of a long-haired person half a century ago when talking about the candidate's origin.
Do they show the same kind of attitude towards Jeb Bush though? He's part of the same generation as Bill and Hillary, first became a (relatively) well-known national figure two decades ago, and is part of perhaps the most succesful dynasty in US political history.
And, of course, the press hostility towards the Clintons long predates them becoming "old News" (which is a fair point).
