Drew Holden Profile picture
Apr 24 28 tweets 16 min read Read on X
🧵THREAD🧵

Do you remember how bad the media’s “Covid lab leak” - the hypothesis that the virus came from a lab - coverage was?

I thought I did. But it was a more dramatic example of uniform media malpractice than even I remembered.

So I revisited it. Buckle in, it’s long. ⤵️
It started in Feb 2020 when @SenTomCotton suggested looking into the CCP lab studying bats near the initial cases in Wuhan.

The media were outraged. In a since-updated piece, @washingtonpost said the idea was a “conspiracy theory that has been repeatedly debunked by experts.”
Image
Image
It wasn’t just WaPo. Shortly thereafter, @nytimes trotted out a similar allegation, calling the lab leak hypothesis a “fringe theory” and a “tale” designed to inflame social media.

@CNN’s @ChrisCillizza said Cotton was “playing a dangerous game” with his suggestions.

Image
Image
Image
@USATODAY, in a since-updated fact check, said that Cotton’s claims were “false” because “overwhelming scientific evidence” said so.


Image
Image
Image
Image
A quick pause here to point something out. What the media were up in arms about wasn’t the veracity of the lab leak idea.

Just that people thought it was *plausible*. That it “may” be true, as @SenTomCotton said.

Look how close the lab is to the first cases. “May” is too much? Image
Anyway, back to the coverage. This was the dawn of what I like to call “experts say” reporting, where an outlet finds someone with credentials who agrees with them to make the point the outlet wants to make.

Here’s @NatGeo, @Forbes, @CBSNews & @washingtonpost doing that here.


Image
Image
Image
Image
There were some even more dramatic examples I want to call out.

Maybe my all time favorite is from @NPR who, with the confidence that only that station posses, claimed that the lab leak theory had been “debunked” in April 2020. Image
This @ABC headline presented without comment Image
It was really a banner time period for outlets using “fact checkers” as a political weapon with no connection to facts, as @CNN does here.

The word of the year had to be “debunked,” which many outlets seemed to believe meant “we don’t like this idea.”
Image
Image
It’s impossible to ignore how this story intersects with Trump & his admin.

Once he said he believed the lab leak idea, the press decided it must be a lie.

Some really rich headlines here from @business (really?), @VICE (remember them?), @CNN (“crushed”!) and @BusinessInsider.


Image
Image
Image
Image
It’s really the condescending tone here from @chrislhayes that gets me. Image
Apropos of absolutely nothing, I want to remind you that @NPR is funded in part by your tax dollars.

More on your tax dollars soon. Image
Just a quick aside. The press at the time purported to be very upset that Trump was using the same language that they had used a few weeks before, to describe the virus as Chinese.

Here’s @CNN.
Image
Image
Then a poll came out finding that lots of people believed the lab leak theory: about a third of Americans.

The press leapt to tar the believers as rubes & the people who convinced them as charlatans.

There’s a lot of this but a few from @CNN, @Forbes, @voxdotcom & @thehill.


Image
Image
Image
Image
One moment you may’ve forgotten: in April 2020, Trump stopped US funding to the lab in question in Wuhan.

Read: up until then, your tax dollars were paying for dubious research in an autocratic regime that maybe started a plague.

Naturally the media applauded that move, right?
Wrong. The press were incensed Trump would stop giving your tax dollars to a shady lab in China.

@CBSNews said it was “jeopardizing” a Covid cure. @nytimes did much the same. @ABC blamed the bad move on “conspiracy theories” as @VanityFair pointed to “right-wing disinformation.”


Image
Image
Image
Image
One phenomenon that really stuck with me is how the press elevated China’s claims in an effort to, I presume, stick it to Trump.

Look at how @nytimes, @CNN and @TIME put the U.S. and China on equal believability footings.

Image
Image
Image
This wasn’t a mere momentary blip. All the way until December, @AP was writing up the lab leak as a conspiracy theory that survived online “despite facts.”

Right.
Image
Image
The enormous irony of the @AP story about Covid “conspiracy theories” is the image that accompanies it.

“Wear a mask outside” the 1984-esq wall art reads. Image
The real facts aren’t as hospitable to what the media was claiming in 2020.

Further investigation into the lab leak in 2021 gave the idea a respectability even the mainstream media couldn’t ignore. They started to change their tune. Here’s @nytimes

Image
Image
Image
Then in 2023 Biden’s own Department of Energy said that the lab leak theory was the most likely explanation for Covid’s origins.

The side-by-sides of the original reporting vs the newly indisputable facts are what I see when I close my eyes at this point. @NPR
Image
Image
You probably don’t need me to spell it out for you, but you really can’t overstate the impact of the failure. When we should’ve been investigating what happened, the press had given social media platforms cover to censor the mere mention of the lab leak.

The media cheered along. Image
As a result of the media refusing to consider a politically inconvenient idea — and their need to throttle its very mention — we may never definitively know what caused a pandemic that’s killed millions and irrevocably changed the course of modern life.
And it may mean that some people get off scot-free for what they’ve done to play a role in that disaster.

Hard to imagine that wasn’t the goal all along, in my humble opinion. Image
There’s a lot more to this story than I could fit into a thread.

You can read a fuller analysis of the media failure and what it means here: open.substack.com/pub/drewholden…
Image
Reminded me of my old pinned tweet, which may be my best, from April 2020.
As @joshrogin rightly notes, I was remiss to not mention that not everyone in the media got to the story wrong. Josh was one of the real bright spots in media coverage of this episode, like this piece from April: washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/…



Image
Image
Image
Image
If you enjoyed this thread, I would really encourage you to subscribe to my newsletter, @holden_court.

In the coming days, I’m planning to announce more opportunities to discuss this and other reporting that I’ll be offering for free for a limited time.
open.substack.com/pub/drewholden…
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Drew Holden

Drew Holden Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrewHolden360

Nov 20
Whatever happened to Harris and Biden’s “strongest economy ever” that the media spent so much time hyping up in the lead up to the election?

I revisit the claims, and explain why they were off the mark about the economy all along, in my latest @AmerCompass.

Quick🧵thread🧵⤵️
It can be easy, in the wake of an election, to forget just how dominant a media narrative was.

One that’s already fading from view was how “great” the economy was, and why it would benefit Harris on Election Day. americancompass.org/its-still-the-…
As a refresher, check out this headline from @axios about the data.

@YahooFinance upgraded Biden’s economic grade to an A. That captures the press sentiment at the time quite well. Image
Image
Read 15 tweets
Nov 18
🧵Thread🧵

In recent days, the mainstream media has taken nakedly ridiculous claims about the tattoos of @PeteHegseth, Trump’s SecDef nominee, to spin up a story alleging he’s an extremist.

It’s an egregious example of politically driven “journalism.” I unpack why. ⤵️
The story really started with @AP, who ran an article claiming that two tattoos that @PeteHegseth has have ties to extremism, citing an extremely thin (and downright suspect) report.

They used that to label him a potential “insider threat” in their headline. Image
Image
It wasn’t until 3 paragraphs in that a reader was told what that claim rested on: a tattoo of a Latin phrase. They’d go on to mention “concerns” about a cross tattoo as well.

Really. @AP Image
Read 21 tweets
Nov 14
Would be great if Trump’s unconventional picks for his cabinet inspire the media to consider a nominee’s credentials.

They might want to look at the current HHS Secretary, Xavier Becerra, who brings to the table the medical experience of being in Congress for 12 terms. Image
Image
Image
Or perhaps Obama’s former HHS Secretary, Sylvia Matthews Burwell, who had just finished her stint lobbying for Walmart. Image
Image
Or Donna Shalala, Clinton’s former head of HHS, whose credentials were as a university administrator and feminist. Image
Image
Read 4 tweets
Nov 4
🧵Thread🧵

Mere days before the election the media, en masse, invented a conspiracy theory alleging Trump threatened Liz Cheney with violence.

Below you’ll see what Trump actually said, and how outlets decided to report it.

Maybe the most dishonest coverage I can recall. ⤵️
The quote comes courtesy of @PhilipWegmann, who does fantastic, real journalism.

Look at the quote. Then look at this headline from @washingtonpost.

Does one follow the other?

No. Trump is making a theoretical point about politicos who cheer for war from the sidelines. Image
Image
And of course it wasn’t just WaPo. Here’s @nytimes doing the same thing.

I’m sticking with the side-by-side format throughout, because I need you to understand the extent of the fabrication. Image
Image
Read 23 tweets
Oct 22
🧵Thread🧵

I know it seems silly, but the media meltdown about Trump working at a McDonald’s is clarifying about why trust in the press has cratered.

Before we get to that, let’s revisit some of the most deranged takes. ⤵️
The press’s response to Trump deciding to troll Harris for her unsupported claims that she worked at McDonald’s by working at the chain himself sent the media into a tizzy.

Here’s @CNN, suddenly apologetic about a corporation in the political limelight. Image
My favorite take came from @nytimes, who appeared outraged that…Trump didn’t wear a hairnet.

No, really. They included it in the subtitle. Image
Read 24 tweets
Oct 16
🧵THREAD🧵

The media is already trying to memory-hole the (first) attempted assassination of former President Trump.

I suspect many of you have felt it happening, but I walked through the details for The Spectator, and wanted to share some of them here.

Follow along ⤵️ Image
First, I just want to level-set to make sure I’m not crazy.

Someone tried to kill the former POTUS, who, according to a variety of polls, is the odds-on favorite to return to that office. Tons of details didn’t make sense.

Seems like the press story of the year, right?

Well…
So far, the press doesn’t seem to think so.

It started as soon as the shots rang out. Do you remember how bad & unhelpful the headlines were?

I’ve got screenshots. @USATODAY @NBCNews (“popping noises”) @CNN (“injured in incident”) @latimes (“loud noises want through the crowd”) Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 17 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(