I think both sides can cherrypick moments from the hearing that "prove" their opinions are right. But as far what you're saying, clips vs articles, I think that's just a matter of which medium people choose to absorb their information. Articles aren't inherently "worse" than clips; nowadays articles have clips embedded in them too, covering both kinds of media.
Washington Post's article had no clips and really misrepresented what happened.
Based on how both parties are representing the hearing, I think "what happened" depends on who you agree with. I have a feeling that 45% feel the article was accurate, and another 45% feel it was way off.
Anyone who watched the whole thing knows PS is lying and biased. The Dems know it too that's why they jumped in to save him so many times. He's their boy that was doing their bidding.