Now I say perhaps because these two takes from @JoyAnnReid should be etched into stone for the rest of human history.
But maybe the all-time best comes from - who else - @JRubinBlogger, who politely asked Avenatti to consider running for Congress before running for President (“I love ya, but…”)
But don’t be fooled. This wasn’t just the fangirling daydreams of a few chatty media types.
We had countless stories just like this one from @NBCNews that helped build Avenatti into a folk icon.
They have…not aged perfectly.
There were a lot of takes about how brilliant Avenatti was, so well positioned to strike at Trump, so likely to be his undoing.
This from @latimes captures the sentiment well. “Trump meets his match”
I’m…not confident this should be the takeaway, @JuliaDavisNews.
For @USATODAY, Avenatti had “cornered” the President and his team (this was around impeachment - Avenatti repeatedly said Trump wouldn’t serve out his term)
Some of the framing was…a little much.
Here, @frankrichny for @NYMag says that, despite the criticism, Avenatti is “the one media whore I can’t get enough of”
There were loving profiles in places like @nytimes.
(That also includes glowing actual coverage about Avenatti and, as we’ll get to soon, his future ambitions).
But it wasn’t just the Times who profiled him. Here’s @NPR which, as a reminder, gets a cut of your tax dollars, doing the same.
And of course the media hung on every twist and turn of the Avenatti saga.
Who can forget the fawning coverage of his presidential ambitions?
I’m not sure the idea that “Michael Avenatti’s Past Won’t Stop Him” - running for President or otherwise - has held up @TIME.
But the worst outlet had to be @MSNBC. Avenatti was a regular fixture on the outlet. They all but played comms director for him, even covering his Twitter spats with President Trump.
@maddow helped push some serious propaganda. And @AriMelber I…I don’t know what to tell you.
A few predictions & other commentary on the network haven’t exactly aged perfectly.
@JoeNBC, might you have preferred your original skepticism?
And @JonathanTurley, do you still stand by the idea that “the Michael I know would not make any allegations that he couldn’t back up”?
Again, the coverage was weird. But I think I will - in this case and in all others - dispute the suggestion that “CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin is America” @washingtonpost@AlexHortonTX
There should be an enormous lesson here: the media is incredibly vulnerable to a certain variety of camera-savvy huckster who tells them what they want to hear.
The media was the mark, and boy did they get taken by Michael Avenatti.
The question now becomes: will anyone learn anything?
Alas, my hunch is no. No one has faced consequences from promoting and fawning over the fraud of Avenatti. Avenatti was good for business. And we’ll see more like him in no time.
Avenatti is the apotheosis of a character that’s been all-too-common in the Trump era: a thinly veiled fraud whom the media push because they say mean things about a Republican.
If the media hopes to build any trust with the American people, they need to stop creating Avenattis.
With the pandemic in the rearview mirror, it can be easy to forget the destruction that it caused.
Food banks have been hit hard. In your charity, if you liked the thread, a donation to Capital Area Food Bank would go a long way. capitalareafoodbank.org
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Having worked on the Hill I get the ubiquity of Politico Pro and its cost.
But I think it takes an enormous suspension of disbelief to call it a conspiracy theory to look askance at the millions of dollars the Biden admin paid the paper that ran this hatchet job on his opponent.
Which, to be clear, is exactly what outlets like @CNN are doing.
@CNN This from @axios seems particularly unreasonable.
It isn’t a “fake theory” to say that Politico is “funded by the government.” It is, to the tune of $8 million. That isn’t in dispute.
Quick 🧵 revisiting corporate media claims on the Covid lab leak theory then (a “conspiracy theory,” “misinformation,” etc.) vs. now (“okay the CIA even admits it”).
Trump’s return to the Oval Office has me reflecting on some of the worst “journalism” during his first term.
Of that long list, one in particular jumps out: the corporate press hype around the Steele dossier.
Do you *really* remember how bad it was? Follow along. ⤵️
Before I dive in, would really encourage you to read my full piece at @Holden_Court, because there’s too much to fit in a thread.
That said, surely you remember the dossier, a bunch of dramatic claims about Trump that even @nytimes now calls “discredited” open.substack.com/pub/drewholden…
But before that, there was the hype: the hero worship of Christopher Steele, the spy who was going to save American from Trump, the Russian puppet.
I mean, @washingtonpost put “hero” right in the title.
The rest of the piece is worse. WaPo repeats the claims — that the Russians had kompromat on him for engaging with prostitutes! Maybe Trump was compromised — verbatim without mentioning in the first instance that there’s no evidence these claims are true! Look at the highlights.
An unthinkable breach of journalistic ethics. There was plenty more.
Do you remember the media meltdown over Trump’s pardons? As Biden hands out decades-long passes to his family and friends, that concern is nowhere to be seen.
Biden no doubt wants you to forget this outrage in the glow of the inaugural.
Don’t. Screenshots help. ⤵️
When Trump announced pardons late in his first term, @nytimes said it “showed his willingness to use his power aggressively on behalf of loyalists” to “override courts, juries and prosecutors to apply his own standard of justice for his allies.”
When Biden did the same thing, @nytimes said he was using his “power to protect people targeted by…Trump” to “head off politically driven prosecutions.”