, 9 tweets, 2 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
Would you believe there was a moment when I saw this in which I literally said *out loud*, "No—not Frank Luntz [posting fake news]!" And then I caught myself and actually laughed because this is *exactly* what I expect from Frank Luntz. These people literally can't or won't read.
Literally *no one* is "blaming Trump" or "claiming [X]" or "theorizing that [X]." There are a few troubling facts out there about *Hannity* that could add up to *nothing*. But there were/are enough facts—it's unquestionable—to think media should look into it briefly. That's *it*.
The GOP playbook—*specifically* on *crime* (any type of crime, anywhere)—has been, since the Southern Strategy, to rely on anecdotes, not data, to score points. The same ploy is used on Twitter: take a tweet, see if it can be twisted/decontextualized, then press "outrage" button.
Luntz doesn't think I "blame Trump" for the deaths of 176 innocents—nor does the Daily Caller. But they're *pretty* sure they've seeded the field sufficiently re: how insane (🤪) progressives are to get their *readers* to think so. It'd just be sad if it wasn't killing discourse.
How Trump handles nonpublic ops info has been a *mainstream* issue for 3 years. So has him using Hannity as a daily adviser. *No one* disputes that Hannity lost it on-air predicting imminent airstrikes. And US officials say an Iranian battery wrongly thought they were facing one.
This was a chance for us to have important, sober talks about 1) how Trump handles intel; 2) who he speaks to about it; 3) how the right is handling Trump's march to war; 4) where folks get their news in times of crisis; 5) the need to dial back the rhetoric. But no—we get Luntz.
Asking military experts if Iran would monitor a top Trump adviser who's on-air during a possible airstrike isn't unreasonable. Asking Hannity where he got nonpublic intel isn't unreasonable. But if the questions have solid answers, fine! Issue *over*. But it's called journalism.
Worst of all, this sort of thing discourages the asking of sincere questions and the airing of real concerns about our rhetoric and who hears it. Wild accusations stated as truth? Yes—discourage them. Mock them, I say. But don't kill reasoned earnest inquiry in our public sphere.
Last one in this thread—if you don't think alt-right trolls wait until a guy like Luntz levels false accusations like this and then go online posing as liberals accusing Trump of murder, you haven't spent the horrid hours in 4chan researching post-internet cultural theory I have.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Seth Abramson

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!