An explosive story from @NPR and @NinaTotenberg about supposed high drama around masking at the Supreme Court imploded today.
I want to take you through how misinformation like this gets mainstreamed by the corporate press and others.
Start here ⤵️
First, some background. @NPR reporter @NinaTotenberg reported that tensions were high at SCOTUS, particularly because Justice Gorsuch had supposedly refused a request from Chief Justice Roberts to put on a mask to help protect Justice Sotomayor.
But then the story started unraveling. First Sotomayor and Gorsuch put out a statement disputing some aspects of the reporting/narrative.
Then, this afternoon, Chief Justice Roberts went on the record to say the masking story was bogus.
But before that denial, the original NPR story was quickly picked up across Twitter and other outlets. In particular, broadcast outlets gave the story plenty of airtime. Here we have the story recycled by both @CNBC and @MSNBC.
On his show list night, @chrislhayes repeated the now-debunked allegations verbatim, talking up how big this story was if it could leak from the air-tight chamber of SCOTUS.
Lots of their other hosts and talking heads joined in. Here’s @mehdirhasan and @KatiePhang promoting a (now-corrected, at least) tweet from @mjs_DC that got a lot of traction on the erroneous reporting.
And resident disinformation pusher @kylegriffin1 shared the story, too.
And she’s got me blocked but @joyannreid went full conspiracy in this case - suggesting that CJ Roberts orchestrated a fake denial, or something.
But it wasn’t just the broadcast voices. Tons of other outlets repeated this reporting - not confirming it with their own sources, mind you, just parroting the storyline back.
And, naturally, plenty of these folks immediately used this reporting - since refuted - as an opportunity to confirm their priors on Gorsuch, the Supreme Court & anyone who isn’t interested in forever masking. That included: @ElieNYC, @Travon, @clairecmc (sheesh) & @ananavarro
I have pointed this out before but once again: the name of @briantylercohen’s show is “No Lie” which is beginning to feel like some sort of Orwellian bad joke given the amount of misinformation he spreads. @NoLieWithBTC
We also heard from the very-online public health “experts” like @LeahNTorres and @gorskon
Is it any wonder that so many in the public have soured on the guidance of public health experts?
And of course the usual Twitter bad actors jumped into the fray. These folks were led, as ever, by @tribelaw, a few times.
He wasn’t alone there, though. There’s too many to include everyone but you had to figure The Lincoln Project jumped this one, so here’s @stuartpstevens. Plus @aravosis and, bleach my eyes, @GeorgeTakei.
I just hope that @BillKristol and @JVLast can see the irony of pushing disinformation as a result of Covid hysteria under the banner of a piece titled “Don’t Let COVID Bring Out the Worst in You”
I think folks get the picture here but just in case here’s: @margotroosevelt (LA Times), @ReignOfApril (black helicopters stuff), @chrisgeidner (“what we thought was up” is too on-the-nose for this wishcasting) & @sadmonsters (the cutting humor I’d expect from the Colbert team)
Many of these people and outlets, you’ll notice, have a professed concern with misinformation.
And yet here they are acting as conduits if not outright creators of politically motivated disinformation to smear their opponents.
And it bears repeating that these sorts of incidents provide a ton of ammunition for people (including people just acting in bad faith) to attack the media more broadly.
It blows my mind that folks aren’t just a little more careful, considering that.
From Russiagate to Covington Catholic and beyond, we see so many of these stories: they *feel* right to reporters/outlets, and so they get repeated, but then they prove to be false.
And confidence in the media erodes from under the feet of folks who’ll shrug this thing off.
But of course, this is the favored variety of misinformation. We won’t see retractions or apologies or Twitter warnings on this content.
And eventually, the cycle will repeat, and the collective faith in the media will grind down even lower.
Two important takeaways:
1) if a story perfectly confirms your priors, wait until it can be confirmed/authenticated before you spike the football, especially if you have a platform.
2) don’t trust unnamed sources, particularly when they confirm all of said priors.
And for those who have asked: I’ve turned on the tip feature on Twitter. These threads are a labor of love but you can throw me beer money (or crypto) on Twitter’s mobile app at this button here:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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.