[turnip123942]

It was the timing of the exposure that could have interfered with the results of the Presidential election which is a major news event in the US that many people perceive to have a higher impact on their lives vs. a quietly disclosed hack/coincidence (F-35 example).

Plus in some people's minds a private defense contractor being "hacked" is more along the lines of industrial espionage instead of a major political party being "hacked" during an election. Even worse, certain news outlets reporting that the election itself(!) was hacked which is misleading and could make people think that voting machines were actually hacked by a foreign power instead of the PsyOps which allegedly took place.

[dv_dt]

There was barely any coverage when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked and the personal data of millions of people holding security clearances was taken. The hue and cry about the social engineering hack of the email of a political party campaign manager seems far in excess of the response for that...

[jonknee]

Is it really surprising that a Presidential election is a juicier press coverage topic than the Office of Personnel Management? The House released a comprehensive and scathing report on the OPM hack:

https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/The-O...

Countries gather intelligence about each other all the time, the interesting part of the hacks surrounding the elections is that the information was made public in an attempt to influence the results. If you recall form the 2008 election both the Obama and McCain campaigns were hacked by China, but it was a conventional information gathering operation. It was in the news, but fell off quickly because nothing was released to try and influence the election.