1. New internal internal #TwitterFiles help explain why privileged reporter hate @elonmusk and Twitter 2.0.
Musk denied access to Twitter's formerly "trusted reporters" and allowed inside entree to more independent journalists.
2. During my trip to Twitter's HQ in San Francisco, I uncovered several documents that explain why reporters now hate Twitter 2.0
Musk fired their friends and cut off their privileged access.
3. For years, Twitter provided favoured access to "disinformation" reporters, giving them access to new products and silencing accounts.
4. Musk ended this access and brought in new reporters to go through the company's documents--something no CEO has ever done before.
5. When Twitter rolled out Birdwatch to label "misinformation" they gave NBC News Ben Collins @oneunderscore__ a demo and exclusive access.
Collins was actually part of the feature's "product development."
6. Collins was really loved inside Twitter, even suggesting him to moderate one of their panels. When they met w/ reporters in NYC, he admitted that Twitter helped propel his professional profile and helped him get on NPR and TV.
7. Musk has now unveiled "community notes" which allows more users to comment than Birdwatch. This hasn't worked out for "fact checkers" like Glenn Kessler at The Washington Post.
8. Reporters apparently also help Twitter by flipping them bills under consideration.
"Our DC-based tech reporters have gotten advance copies of at least five bills .... that would give more power to regulators."
9. Twitter dealt with bills to moderate them from suspending conservatives by ducking behind trade associations "to do the heavy lifting ... as engaging or commenting ... would give them more attention."
10. Twitter met w/ NYC reporters to "solidify key relationships, encourage intel sharing ... reinforce comm's network of trusted reporters."
(I was not invited)
11. One "trusted reporter" was Makena Kelly of Vox
"She'll be reporting out of a deep red state--will mis disinformation resonate?"
This implied Twitter & Makena knew the "disinformation" paradigm doesn't translate outside liberal talking circle.
12. Kelly showed no interest in Democratic Party "misinformation"
"Looking into 'Republican Party Hype House' on TikTok--tied to Turning Point USA?"
13. CNN glad hander Brian Stelter: "Willing to come to San Francisco, wherever to meet 1:1 with spokespeople even for introductory conversations."
CNN's Oliver Darcy: "Would love to hear pitches from us."
14. CNN also asked if Twitter could create a "read only mode" to protect their reporters from "harassment."
(How often to reporters ask a company they cover to modify company policies?)
15. CNN's Donie O'Sullivan: "Always interested in account enforcement such as Rep Marjorie Taylor Green."
Other Twitter Files show "disinformation" reporters obsessed with this Congresswoman.
16. Fox News producer for Dana Perino: "Is really eager to get us on the show .... Dana would be fair and not any more tough than the nicest person to question us in Congress." (I laughed when I first read this)
17. Fox News tech reporter Brook Singman: "I think we have a good opportunity to influence this coverage and potentially the reputations of congressional newcomers."
18. Many thanks to @TexasLindsay_ for helping collect and organise these #TwitterFiles. We read and read until our eyes bled.
1) EXCLUSIVE DOCUMENTS: Working w/ @mtaibbi we report on @CCDHate documents showing the Labour Party's political front's objective is "Kill Musk's Twitter" thru "Advertising focus" meaning harass his advertisers.
See internal documents provided by a whistleblower.
2) Internal Center for Countering Digital Hate document shows their annual objective is "Kill Musk's Twitter"
This is their internal monthly planner. Their goal is to also trigger regulatory action, although they are a tax-exempt nonprofit.
3) CCDH held a private conference w/ a slew of liberal groups organizing against Musk including Biden White House, Congressman Adam Schiff's office, Biden/Harris State Department officials, Canadian MP Peter Julian & Media Matters for America
1) Twitter Files: Democrats & media claimed Twitter 1.0 was a “private company” that made its own decisions, despite Biden Administration pressure to censor.
But new emails show Twitter hired a lobby shop staffed w/ Biden loyalists & then coordinated w/ Biden State Dept.
2) “This is John Hughes from Albright Stonebridge Group, the commercial diplomacy firm founded by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright,” wrote Twitter’s lobbyist to a senior official at State.
Twitter was seeking “advice” and help.
3) Politico reported around this same time that 10 of Biden’s top foreign policy crowd came from Albright Stonebridge.
2) Cochrane's Karla Soares-Weiser put out a statement attacking Cochrane's own mask review due to pressure from Zeynep Tufekci:
“Lisa, I have been back and forth with NYT about the mask review. CAN I GET YOUR VIEWS ON THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS?”
3) Several days later, Tufekci published a "masks work" essay in the NY Times and Karla Soares-Weiser rushed out a statement claiming problems with the mask review.
Soares-Weiser did this w/o consulting the scientists who wrote the mask review.
1) Going through hundreds of emails, it's clear @zeynep bullied Cochrane into publishing a statement against their own review and twisted the words of Cochrane editor Michael Brown.
2) After Cochrane published their 2023 mask review update, Bret Stephens wrote a NYT column ridiculing mask mandate activists--people like Zeynep Tufekci.
3 days later on Feb 24, Zeynep contacted Cochrane, but not the scientists. She went around them to the editors.
3) Zeynep introdued herself to Cochrane editor Michael Brown as an "academic" working on a review "in my own field."
Zeynep has published 0 in the academic literature this year, and one article in 2023--an opinion piece. As for that review, it has never appeared.