Custer’s accounts presented it as a military success, and the press largely accepted this framing.

The differences in coverage reflected the differences in the two events: Sand Creek was clearly unauthorized by any legitimate military authority and was clearly directed at a camp under military protection; the Washita was an authorized military operation that could be defended, however unconvincingly, as a legitimate engagement against a camp associated with raiders.

The contrast illuminates the limits of the accountability mechanisms available at the time.

When an attack was clearly and obviously a crime, the democratic institutions could produce investigation and condemnation.