Drew Holden Profile picture
May 25, 2021 26 tweets 16 min read Read on X
🧵THREAD🧵

That the Covid pandemic could’ve leaked from a lab in Wuhan went from terrible, racist conspiracy theory to plausible overnight for the mainstream media, without a shred of accountability.

If you don’t believe me, look at these stories side-by-side, then vs. now⤵️
You may remember that much of the really bad coverage was focused on @SenTomCotton’s suggestion that we better understand the potential for a lab leak from Wuhan.

The difference in framing here from @nytimes between May 2020 and May 2021 is...stark.
But it wasn’t just NYT. There’s a lot of ammo from @CNN, too.

Not even two months ago, they ran a piece writing off the lab leak theory as “like something out of a comic book.”

Yesterday, the tone had changed, without any reference to their own role in the previous debate.
But if you go back further, @CNN’s coverage gets even worse.

Early in 2020, they ran CCP talking points suggesting it was all a political tactic based on “disinformation.”

A little over a year later, CNN is asking the same questions President Trump and his team were panned for.
@ChrisCillizza has been a key voice for @CNN on this. In February 2020, he cited a CNN factchecker who concluded you can “say that didn’t happen” about the lab leak.

Yesterday, he seemed baffled that Dr. Fauci wasn’t entirely on his side anymore.

So much for “trust the science”
I can’t say this enough. In early 2020, @washingtonpost accused @SenTomCotton of “fanning the embers of a conspiracy theory repeatedly debunked by experts” for asking the same questions the Post’s reporting is currently asking.
And for some reason @washingtonpost’s timeline of events just so happens to omit their own “fact check” of the lab leak theory from April 2020 that concluded “the balance of the scientific evidence strongly suggests the conclusion that the new coronavirus emerged from nature.”
@politico had a quicker about-face than most. While they decried that the Wuhan lab was “at the center of conspiracy theories about the pandemic’s origin,” in March 2021 they resurfaced worries about “risky coronavirus experiments” from 2018.

Wonder why “no one listened.”
Much of the problem originally was that so many outlets relied on less than trustworthy sources - like the lab itself - to reject the lab leak theory & render it a “conspiracy theory.”

Even @Reuters, who doesn’t usually make the threads, did this. It was unbelievably pervasive.
I don’t know how else to put it. @NPR was awful about this one.

In April 2020, the story was “scientists debunk lab accident theory” but in March 2021 the idea suddenly “takes on new life”.

Did anyone consider who killed the original theory? I have an idea.
I’ve talked often about how the media has an enormous power in shaping narratives through framing.

Here’s an example from @thehill. Trump is portrayed as acting in bad faith (“efforts to blame China for the virus”) and then that framing gets jettisoned when no longer necessary.
For @BBCNews, the lab leak theory went from a conspiracy theory on par with China’s suggestion that the US created the virus to “all hypotheses are on the table” without an ounce of self awareness.
Again, why did no one at @BusinessInsider stop to consider whether the director of the lab that had just been accused (by the leader of the free world) of starting a once in a century plague might not be telling the entire truth?

Seems something changed since.
Unfortunately there was a lot to work with for @BusinessInsider. I couldn’t help but include these two pieces that haven’t exactly aged perfectly.
The extent to which the mainstream media trusted the lab in Wuhan at their word is jarring. @FortuneMagazine was just one of many.

But it’s also impossible to ignore - both here and in general - that the contrast is always between Wuhan and President Trump. More on that later.
The worst part of all of this (except for the damage to public trust, of course) is the absolute lack of accountability.

The media totally blew it on this story in ways that could make it less likely that we ever get to the bottom of this. Without offering so much as an apology.
There have been a couple of exceptions. The best in my estimation is this piece from @jonathanchait that tracks through some of the bad coverage in a way that doesn’t make excuses: google.com/amp/s/nymag.co…
But broadly, the old reporting went down the memoryhole and has already been incinerated. No lessons will be learned. No improvements will be made. This will happen again.

And it will continue to be everyday Americans who suffer the impact of bad information.
My (unsolicited) postmortem: the idea that President Trump could’ve been right about something this important w/o definitive public proof was something journos and newsrooms simply could not bring themselves to take seriously.
Instead, because they hated Trump so much, they preferred to trust a lab run by shadowy hostile autocrats who had every incentive to lie (and long history of lying) about something that could turn out to be the most consequential coverup in living memory.

That’s...not good.
But these are precisely the sorts of blind spots we should expect from a collection of people who all share the same worldview. Until that changes - until we get more perspectives/people who don’t have those blind spots - all of this will continue to get worse.
And these aren’t all the bad takes. I did another thread last week with even more, it’s just that not every outlet has done an about face (yet).

I have a feeling this thread will get longer, unfortunately.
And if you haven’t already, read this piece from @redsteeze that urges us not to let this one go by unremarked. google.com/amp/s/spectato…
Okay, this one blew up so I’ll reup that I finally broke down and made a Patreon. If you’ve ever felt urged to throw me some beer money, link is below.

Half of anything I get will go to a charity combatting homelessness in DC. patreon.com/drewholden360?…
Probably goes without saying but, after all of this, Biden’s decision to shut down the probe into the lab leak theory doesn’t look great. google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.…
Also this piece and thread by @mattyglesias is really good.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Drew Holden

Drew Holden 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!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrewHolden360

Jun 27
🧵Thread🧵

You remember Russian Collusion. But do you remember the “Russian bounties” allegation, where the press ran with a conspiracy theory to make Trump look like a monster?

With the debate tonight, I think it’s timely to revisit a falsehood Biden pushed. Follow along ⤵️
It started with a scoop from @nytimes that claimed Russia had placed bounties on American soldiers in Afghanistan, that Trump knew about it, and he did nothing.
Image
Image
Days later, @washingtonpost followed up with the claim that these bounties—again, allegedly ignored by Trump—led to the deaths of American servicemen.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 24 tweets
Jun 12
🧵Thread🧵

Do you *really* remember the Hunter Biden laptop story? I fear we’ve lost the plot.

With Hunter’s name in the news I wanted to revisit the extent to which the media went to cover up corruption allegations against—and at the behest of—his father.

Follow along. ⤵️
You have to start with the scoop from @nypost and @EmmaJoNYC.

Their lede from October was damning:

“Hunter Biden introduced his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden, to a top executive at a Ukrainian energy firm less than a year before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating the company.”Image
Image
Image
The story was fundamentally about Joe Biden’s alleged corruption. It was huge news, on the eve of an election.

The press leapt to claim the scoop wasn’t legit. And they reframed the issue: now it was about Hunter, not Joe. Here’s @NPR before/after
Image
Image
Read 27 tweets
May 29
Good to see the NYT’s considerable resources being put to finding the truth in a debate between private citizens that led one of them to raise a flag upside down.

Real afflict the comfortable, comfort the afflicted stuff here.
This is not, in a well ordered universe, news.

It has only become “news” because of the pivot to left wing clickbait that Trump inspired among the press.
It’s politically inspired harassment and not only is it noxious it’s driving a deep animus among its target demo that is fraying what remains of the bounds of our body politic and society more broadly.
Read 4 tweets
May 28
🧵Thread🧵

I’ve got an oldie-but-a-goodie for you from the archive of unhinged media coverage.

Do you remember how insane the coverage of Trump’s killing of Iranian Gen. Soleimani was?

I bet it’s worse than you remember. Follow along ⤵️
It all started with what I’ve gotta say might be the coldest presidential use of social media in history.

After ordering the strike that killed Iranian General Qaseem Soleimani, Trump tweeted out simply a picture of an American flag.

Many in the media went berserk. Image
First, the issue was directly with what Trump had done. Outlets claimed that he was rushing America into a war. @washingtonpost tried to point out the hypocrisy of a president who had said he would prevent a war.

All evidence suggests he did exactly that.
Image
Image
Read 25 tweets
May 23
My hottest take is that, outside of the Beltway (something, to be clear, I am not!) most Americans to the right of MSNBC simply don’t feel anything like “vertigo” about Trump. Image
I think part of why Trump is such a visceral experience for so many people who have been in DC for a long time is that these types of people (again, me included!) weren’t familiar with the idea that they could viscerally hate a politician even when he’s out of office.
I think, for lots of people, hating a politician for who they are is not a new experience, but is in fact their default setting for politicians of at least one political party — if not both.
Read 5 tweets
May 22
If you were making a parody of MSNBC, what would you do differently than what the network already produces? Image
I recognize this is an opinion piece but the decision to run an opinion piece is…a decision.
I’m imagining every on-air host at MSNBC reading this headline and starting to think this could be a Veep-like tv show.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


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

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(