I know it can seem easy to laugh or shrug off. But it’s instructive in why so many people don’t trust the corporate press and the Dems & commentators who help drive it.
So let’s revisit ⤵️
First, a reminder on the original details. Actor @JussieSmollett alleged that two white men wearing MAGA hats out for a stroll at 2 AM in Chicago in -20 degree weather recognized him & beat him up yelling racist and homophobic slurs. Luckily, he fought them off, supposedly.
The press quickly jumped on the story despite the relatively inconceivable nature of the allegations, asserting that surely this had happened as Smollett describes.
Here’s @CNN reporting this as not something they was alleged but that definitely happened (multiple times).
There were plenty of voices within @CNN, too, who leaned in on this one, including @donlemon (peep the reference), @brianstelter (“we may never know what happened on that street in Chicago”) and @keithboykin (sheesh)
Even the outlets who weren’t at the forefront of pushing the story bought the idea that the two most racist, homophobic Empire fans might’ve been waiting around a bone-chillingly cold Chicago night to dole out violence.
Maybe no outlet did more to promote this hoax than @ABC.
For weeks they covered every undulation of the “brutal attack” and - like the Times, CNN & most places - always framed it as a foregone conclusion that the details were true.
Now we know they were all lies.
And even given the opportunity to push on the really implausible details of the story, instead @ABC went so far as to develop their own graphics quoting how upset Smollett was at his “doubters”
And it wasn’t just ABC who did the latter. Plenty of outlets not only pushed out everything Smollett had to say but served as conduits for his (and his allies’) outrage that anyone would dare question his story. Here’s @AP.
It wouldn’t be a thread without a mention of @MSNBC. No surprise that they were all too happy to pile on for this one, including leading conspiracy theorist (and person who has me blocked) @joyannreid.
@Yamiche of NPR helped lead the charge, parroting the ridiculous claims made by Smollett and his family, including the allegation that Smollett was the victim of the kind of “‘domestic terrorism’ happening to people across the country” (?!)
Again. There was A LOT of this, even after the story started to unravel. I don’t have space for every outlet but here’s:
A lot of folks have wondered why Smollett would do something like this.
My hunch is that the expected outpouring of supportive news must’ve factored in. And @Variety, @HuffPost, @etnow and @NYMag were among the outlets happy to deliver.
Of course, it wasn’t just the media.
Both now President @JoeBiden and Vice President @KamalaHarris put out moving statements attesting to Smollett’s character and how awful America is, which haven’t exactly aged perfectly.
Remember “an attempted modern day lunching”? I do.
In particular, @RepMaxineWaters went out of her way to blame Trump for the hoax, claiming that he was responsible “for emboldening racists” like Smollett’s attackers which…hasn’t aged well, either, I don’t think.
Also worth pointing out that President Trump, who I don’t believe is on Twitter, bought the Smollett hoax, too.
And naturally the lefty blue check brigade drew a lot of very definitive conclusions from the supposed ordeal, particularly around Trump. I won’t have room for all of them but here’s a few egregious ones:
We saw the truly fake news promoted by many people who are, supposedly, very worried about disinformation and how it spreads on the internet, like @MSignorile and @cmclymer.
And a number of once-credible organizations decided this was a hill worth dying on, including @ACLU and @ADL (and @JGreenblattADL).
Perhaps next time they’ll be more discerning about unbelievable stories.
Now, shockingly, no one wants to talk about it.
@CharlesMBlow of the Times captures that duality well: when the story confirmed someone’s priors, it was worth talking about. As soon as it turns out that it never did, the refrain was ‘why do we bother talking about this?’
And of course the usual grifters were plenty happy to jump onto the bandwagon.
That includes @TheRevAl, @democracynow and @mmpadellan. Not that any had credibility left, but you would at least think they could avoid spewing more disinformation.
All of this happened because the preposterous story Smollett spun checked too many boxes (about race, sexuality, Trump) to be worth asking a few journalism 101 questions.
If you’d like to know why trust in the media is at an all-time low, look no further.
The corporate press loves to wax poetic about the terrible role of disinformation in society, and yet they race against each other to be the first to uncritically share an absurd hoax.
Maybe the real problem isn’t a meme your grandmother shared on Facebook.
Smollett is only the latest in a long series of stories pushed by the corporate press that never materialized - from Covington Catholic to Russiagate and beyond.
If the press wants to rebuild trust, they can start by not uncritically promoting lies.
I’m not holding my breath.
The reaction here from Biden & Co is unsurprising. My concern - one I have a feeling I’m not alone in - is that nothing has been learned. Not from Russiagate or CovCatholic or Hunter’s “disinfo” laptop or “Russian bounties” or the Steele dossier and on it goes.
The media are melting down about former FBI director Jim Comey’s indictment, calling it Trump’s “retribution.”
But if prosecuting a political rival is such an outrage, why’d they cheer along when Biden went after Trump, Bannon & Navarro?
Some side-by-sides ⤵️
I want you to help me spot the difference in tone.
With Comey, @CNN put five — five! — reporters on the byline to declare the indictment was an “escalation” in “Trump’s effort to prosecute his political enemies.”
Where was that when Biden’s DOJ indicted Bannon? “A victory”
And @CNN wasn’t any better on Peter Navarro, another Trump aide indicted under Biden.
Rather than an “effort to prosecute…political enemies,” CNN quoted the prosecutor to tell the story.
Why is the claim of the government the framing of the piece under Biden? I have a guess.
The outrage over Kimmel’s canning is incredibly stupid, but it’s also enormously rich coming from the same media outlets who have cheered the government actually censoring people, particularly during COVID.
Let me know if you can spot the difference in tone? ⤵️
This @CNN headline made me think this story needed a thread.
Kimmel’s suspension is “straight from a European strongman’s playbook,” per @CNN’s @brianstelter.
When Biden cracked down on free speech during Covid, CNN hyped up the effort.
Few promoted the government’s actual attack on free speech more aggressively than the same @brianstelter now calling a comedian’s shelving evidence of autocracy, or something.
I know there’s a lot going on but we just had a media conspiracy implode that I think captures something important about the corporate press.
Did you hear about how Trump was allegedly going after John Bolton as retribution for his criticism?
Well…follow along ⤵️
We saw a week straight of media suggestions that Trump was abusing the powers of the state to deal out “retribution” to John Bolton following the news that the FBI (“Trump’s DOJ!” headlines rang out) raided his house.
We were in “unsettling” times, to hear @nytimes tell it.
The *Editorial Board* at @nytimes put out an even more dramatic statement, asking who Trump’s next payback victim after Bolton would be.
A single poll has bootstrapped a media narrative that DC residents are outraged by Trump’s takeover.
I poked around the cross tabs of the poll — of 600 or so of DC’s more comfortable residents — and I think it’s pretty suspect.
How come? Follow along: ⤵️
Let’s start with the poll. The @washingtonpost talked to 604 people, of whom 90% — 90%! — self-described as living in “very good” or “good” neighborhoods.
So, fine. 80% of people who like where they live in DC are upset.
But even beyond that, it’s worth asking whether this poll really captures DC’s opinion.
In the poll, only 31% describe crime as a “serious” or “very serious” problem in DC.
When @washingtonpost asked this same question in May, *50%* said it was a serious problem.
I feel like I’m losing my mind about the Biden autopen pardons.
The former president said he made every decision. His staff says that he didn’t actually make the final call on thousands of them.
We’re supposed to treat this as normal?
I try to unpack. ⤵️
This got new life from a Biden interview w/ @nytimes.
NYT leads by repeating Biden’s claim that he made the calls…burying the admissions that 1) he really didn’t & 2) where he allegedly did, the aids sending details to the autopen weren’t in the room when the call was made…
…instead, they relied on what senior staff had allegedly heard, which was then passed along.
The piece ends with the revelation that Biden’s then-chief of staff gave the final sign off.
Given what the former admin has lied about, why should we trust this reporting of events?
The coverage of the anti-ICE riots in LA is perhaps the clearest example of advocacy “journalism” in Trump’s second term.
Reading the reporting, you would never know the most significant fact: the American people support Trump’s deportations.
Follow along ⤵️
First, the facts about the riots.
You’ve seen the burning cars, looting & clashes between police & protestors.
Demonstrators blocked the freeway, attacked ICE agents, all in an effort to prevent the deportations of illegal aliens. Trump deployed troops to allow ICE to operate.
As @MarkHalperin and @seanspicer discussed, the situation in LA is so tranquil that the mayor has instituted a curfew for the city.