Since I'm doing threads, I'll do one more. Someone asked me last week why I tend to get so many stories right early on that much of the mainstream press and partisan press gets wrong? It's a combination of common sense, research, curiosity, and skepticism.
When people see a story (myself included) they tend to think about whether it aligns with a narrative they already believe. That often leads to people falling for things that are false, but fit with what they want to believe.

(Happens to everyone!)
But I've developed a habit of often (not always!) then pausing and asking some questions: 1) Does it make sense? 2) Is the sourcing reliable? 3) What are people who would disagree w that narrative saying? 4) Does it need more evidence?
The problem with a lot of the press (partisan and MSM) is they are surrounded by people who agree with them so they definitely don't look at 3 and rarely consider 1,2, and 4. If it fits the narrative, they run with it.
Example: I remember seeing the Russia bounty story. I'm predisposed to believe it. Russia def. wanted us out and doesn't mind American troop deaths. My view of Trump suggests he cd ignore it. But then I saw the sourcing was very questionable so I paused & decided to wait 4 more.
Another: When Kavanugh thing was going down, I had a major writer ask me about an NBC story that just came out. I did some quick searching of the underlying evidence and found the source was an anonymous random letter w/ 0 proof. But a ton of reporters just ran with it.
I could give a thousand other examples where I've had popular threads debunking major narratives bc I asked simple questions and did some basic research that anyone can do (Kavanaugh, Covington Catholic, GA election law, voter fraud, Covid-19 conspiracies, lab leak etc.).
Anyways, the point of this thread is that anyone can do these things and we would be much better off if more journalists started doing exactly that. Until then, I will keep writing about their errors each week: patreon.com/user?u=1427827…

• • •

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

Keep Current with AG

AG 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 @AGHamilton29

2 Jun
I probably should just ignore it, but this @JVLast post on the alleged "double standard" of conservative media is so bad that it's worthy of dissecting how it repeatedly misleads readers to sell a narrative.

thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/the-conserva…
So it starts with this juxtaposition. He's putting the largest news publications in the country accusing those of simply bringing up the possibility of a lab leak of promoting a debunked conspiracy on the same level as random people claiming it was a bio-weapon (who?)
Next, "over time" is doing a lot of work here & the claim of more pieces is just nonsense. A year and a half later some are retracting something that was obvious in Feb of 2020. And there is more whitewashing going on than self-reflection from much of the press.
Read 10 tweets
29 May
I'm just going to do this once, then ignore the angry comments.

1- Many on the right have gone out of their way to wrongly downplay 1/6. An angry mob, fueled by 2 months of false conspiracies, tried to take over the Capitol and attacked Capitol Police.
Cont) There was no chance of them being successful, but the goal was clearly to alter the outcome of the electoral process.

2- Some on the left and in the media are now exaggerating the situation to score political points. As an example, it was not comparable to 9/11.
3) The initial reports on Officer Sickick being killed due to a blow to the head were wrong. He died of a stroke and claims he was murdered are incorrect. That does not mean that the events that day did not play a role in his death. Unknowable to what extent.
Read 8 tweets
29 May
Put this in the context of the filibuster debate: Dems forced through a really questionable oversized 2.2T relief bill because they could pass it without any Republican buy-in. Only now are we having a debate about the potential harms as inflation concerns are growing.
Biden admin ended up negotiating a few small details w Manchin and then just passed it without any actual attempt at compromise. Now imagine that extends to other significant topics. It's supposed to be hard to pass big legislation because it has real impacts. You need concensus.
As for the economic debate: You still get the feeling that a lot of academic economists are either ignoring or downplaying extent of inflation in the market (esp in manufacturing). Spending additional trillions we don't have now would be a big mistake.
Read 4 tweets
29 May
It’s a good thing we aren’t a democracy then. Also, I love all these guys pretending like the 11 Senators just abstained by accident. The system is meant to make it difficult to implement significant changes and requires consensus. That’s a good thing for stability.
The debate over the filibuster isn’t about one particular bill or policy because it’s about how our system works, though those that only care about short-sighted gains keep pretending otherwise because the goal is to bully supporters of the filibuster into just giving in.
The government’s role isn’t to constantly radically change the direction of the country. That’s exactly what you will have if you remove this essential check & a party w a bare majority in Congress and control of the WH can pass anything. Esp w how polarized things are now.
Read 4 tweets
27 May
These people can admit to being wrong or that people they don't like were right so instead they dig deeper and have embarrassing double downs like this.

Tom Cotton asked the right questions. Tom attacked him for it & now is desperately spinning to justify being wrong.
Tom accused Cotton of being a "conspiracy theorist" for merely asking the same questions that now everyone agrees are legitimate.

Then when called out for it back then, he kept falsely accusing Cotton of suggesting it was a bioweapon.
can't*
Read 8 tweets
26 May
This is the Washington Post fact-checker posting an opinion piece full of absolute falsehoods and smears with a map meant to intentionally misinform readers.

Our media really is garbage.
Just to be clear, the person whose piece @GlennKesslerWP just promoted is a former PLO spokesperson.

Here is her defending Hamas while being grilled by Jake Tapper:
Seriously watch that video. It’s 6 minutes of her defending and obfuscating on behalf of a terrorist group. That’s whose voice Kessler and the NYT choose to promote right now.

Garbage.
Read 4 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

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!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(