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 new book “Original Sin” from Jake Tapper & Alex Thompson recounts the effort to cover up Biden’s cognitive decline ahead of the election. The authors point to many guilty parties.
The one glaring omission? Their colleagues in the corporate press. Follow along ⤵️
There are numerous dramatic reveals. The Biden team considered condoning him to a wheelchair? Maybe in his fog he forgot about the border?
But as I worked on a review for @commonplc, the one thought that I kept coming back to was that you can’t tell this story without the press.
Perhaps no one was more vital to the continued fiction that Biden had it together than the media.
Tapper and Thompson even highlight some of the telling moments.
Biden’s cancer diagnosis is a tragedy I know first-hand.
But our sympathy can’t silence questions about Biden’s cognitive decline, clarified just days ago by the Hur tape.
The media tried to bury the story then. They’re trying again now.
I’ve got the receipts. ⤵️
When the report first came out in 2024, outlets rushed to demean Hur, accusing him of serving as a Republican hatchet man.
Just look at this take from @USATODAY, who assembled sympathetic voices to make the case that Hur “crossed the line.” They found an expert to call it a “disgrace” and then featured the obviously unbiased Eric Holder to lead a section titled “Way too many gratuitous remarks.”
The audio makes clear that Hur, if anything, played down how alarming the claims were.
(If you haven’t listened to the Hur audio yet, you should.)
It should go without saying, but the media cultivating this type of baseless hysteria about an admin for partisan reasons is much more of a threat to the underpinnings of our democracy than anything Trump has actually done.
Quick 🧵⤵️
A couple quotes:
“If you think that there’s this thing out there called America, and it’s exceptional, that means you don’t have to do anything” to stop fascism.
What? What does that even mean??
That if you, like millions of Americans!, believe in American exceptionalism…you’re a fascist?
Really?
“The powers that be can do whatever they want to you”
Trump can’t even deport people who have deportation orders against them without a federal judge stepping in.
Many in the media are trying to claim that the press was merely duped by Biden’s White House about the former president’s cognitive decline.
That simply isn’t true. The media actively took part in the coverup.
Don’t let them forget. I’ve got screenshots. ⤵️
I’ve done a number of threads on this but putting some of the most egregious stuff in one place.
Perhaps the most damming: Two weeks before the debate made Biden’s cognitive decline inescapable, @washingtonpost gave “Four Pinocchio’s” to allegedly edited videos showing Biden clearly displaying cognitive problems, dismissing them as “pernicious” efforts “to reinforce an existing stereotype” while quoting the White House to say the videos were “cheap fakes” — all to defend Biden against criticisms about his age and well-being.
That story came four days after a previous effort from @washingtonpost to write off these videos as Republican efforts to mislead voters: proof, the Post claimed, that “the politics of misinformation and conspiracy theories do not stop at the waters edge.”
I’m not sure people realize just how egregious some of NPR’s “journalism” has been. Amid the debate about defunding the network, I wanted to walk down memory lane to revisit some of its worst coverage.
There’s a lot. ⤵️
First, perhaps the most egregious display of activist journalism: their response to the Hunter Biden laptop story of corruption involving a major party candidate on the eve of the election.
Not only did @NPR not cover it, they bragged about refusing to do so.
Insofar as @NPR did cover the Hunter Biden scandal, they actively tried to cover it up.
They applauded Facebook & Twitter strangling the story as part of a push against “misinformation and conspiracy theories.”
The story, of course, turned out to be far from invented.