,
20 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
Now that the Pats have beat the Rams let's address some blatant distortions around our NBC News story taking a snapshot of how candidate Gabbard has been promoted by Russian outlets since her announcement Jan 11.
It's erroneous and not headline-worthy for @ggreenwald or anyone to assert we "relied" on the analysis of any 3rd party firm. That's not true.
The nutgraph or meat of our story compares the volume and tone of the coverage on RT, Sputnik, and Russia Insider for Gabbard compared to her other dem rivals. She has twice the stories of her nearest competitor, and they're all favorable, despite having low voter recognition.
NBC News doesn't mention New Knowledge until the...let's see...33rd paragraph, and then only as part of a group of experts weighing in. Hm, is that how you place a source that you're basing your entire story on?
This is the actual meat of our story:
"Since Gabbard announced her intention to run on Jan. 11, there have been at least 20 Gabbard stories on three major Moscow-based English-language websites affiliated with or supportive of the Russian government:..."
"...RT, the Russian-owned TV outlet; Sputnik News, a radio outlet; and Russia Insider, a blog that experts say closely follows the Kremlin line...."
"...The coverage devoted to Gabbard, both in news and commentary, exceeds that afforded to any of the declared or rumored Democratic candidates despite Gabbard's lack of voter recognition."
There's a lot wild conflation and hyperbole over New Knowledge and it hasn't added up to enough discourage me from talking to Renee, a deeply thoughtful researcher I've interviewed at length, a straight shooter who is careful to only speak from the facts.
Before falling down and accepting someone's bad faith rabbit hole you should read this all the way through: medium.com/@jonathonmorga…
Let's also "push back" on this bogus conspiracy theory that Gabbard's foreign policy views is what drew our eye of Sauron or something.
RT has already posted two articles slamming the report. 👍👍 
And Russia Insider, which follows the Kremlin line and routinely copies articles from other sites, has reposted Glenn's article in its entirety.
So let's recap: our story and anyone who posted positively about it were immediately ratio'd by sketchy accounts.
Which is so interesting because reporters in Hawaii who write critically about her experience immediate visceral pushback from an array of accounts. civilbeat.org/2014/10/denby-…
Mr. @ggreenwald wrote a foaming and misleading story taking something from the 33rd graph and making it the headline and attacking every source he could Google, and made poppycock claims about the story's substance because I guess he didn't read carefully and got very upset.
That was amplified and echoed by folks on the left and known Russian state media outlets --- then right-wing partisans picked tweeted about it and Gateway Pundit wrote it up, and Russia Insider reblogged the article.
Thus completing the circle or horseshoe if you will.
Thus completing the circle or horseshoe if you will.
All because at the end of the day people and "people" are supposedly angry that it's possible to compare volume and tone of links and tweets from known Russian outlets and analyze what they're saying to get a view into their possible priorities and interests.
Let's also not forget how RT and Sputnik work.
The facts in the reporting by @rwindrem and myself speak for themselves. nbcnews.com/politics/2020-…
