Clint Eastwood’s new film “Richard Jewell” has a lot of journalists very upset. No, not over what happened to Richard Jewell, but over how it makes some journalists look bad. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, which spearheaded the smear campaign, is demanding “a statement publicly acknowledging that some events were imagined for dramatic purposes and artistic license and dramatization were used in the film’s portrayal of events and characters. We further demand that you add a prominent disclaimer to the film to that effect.”

Well, as we noted above, there’s no shortage of angry firefighters. But we wouldn’t be doing our job if we didn’t shine a special light on Philadelphia Inquirer national opinion columnist Will Bunch, who, coincidentally, has his panties in a bit of a bunch over “Richard Jewell”:

Having not seen the film ourselves, we can’t really comment on the film’s treatment of the “dead female journalist” Kathy Scruggs. But we do feel pretty confident in saying that Bunch’s real problem is that Eastwood’s film, unlike so many other Hollywood offerings, doesn’t depict journalists as heroic crusaders for truth and justice.

Naturally, the Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan — no stranger to biased hackery — is fully on board with Bunch’s characterization:

Won’t someone please think of the journalists?

It’s not Donald Trump’s fault that the media’s reputation is in the toilet. It’s not Clint Eastwood’s fault. The media built that; they made that happen. And because Clint Eastwood and “Richard Jewell,” unlike most of Hollywood, are actually holding garbage journalists responsible for their journalistic malpractice, the garbage journalists are pitching a fit.

Maybe instead of screaming at Clint Eastwood for making them look bad, journos like Will Bunch should take a long, hard look in the mirror.

Meanwhile, if Bunch et al. think their histrionics will keep Americans away from “Richard Jewell,” they’re in for a deservedly rude awakening.