Something important, subtle, and largely un-discussed is shaping the way all of us perceive what's happening now. Shifts in editorial standards and a series of biases in reporting and especially amplification are herding the news in one direction.
I'll explain with examples– 1/
I'll explain with examples– 1/
There are reasons why pretty much everything you see now describes panic, chaos, and backbiting. Reporters are looking for those things, they are getting print and headlines, and the other stuff is getting twisted, downplayed or cut. This works many ways in practice– 2/
Take the case of the secret letter and the 25 mysterious Democrats. Last night this appeared part way down a wire flash from Reuters. The source was a lone "House Democratic aide" described neither as senior nor as leadership. They didn't have the letter or know its provenance 3/ 
So many reporters asked me for this letter (all kindly and most apologetically blaming their editor) that I had to turn my phone off to work (which I never do!). I still don't know a thing about it and heard from many colleagues who don't either. Is it real? I have no idea! 4/
You're soo many blind quotes from panicked Dems rn. Is every Dem panicked? Or are a small number panicking widely? Are they senior or randos? The attributions in this include "officials" "confidante" and "person in Biden's orbit." Who the hell are these people? I have no idea! 5/
One thing you can be sure of- if quotes are from people who are saying "I think we should be careful and think" or "I support the President" or whatever, that probably won't get ink. If it does it'll be at the end (see below) because it isn't the news editors want right now 6/
Some places just wouldn't have run stories they're running now a month ago with this sourcing. That I suspect even now the thin Reuters sourcing made other outlets wary of picking it up because of editorial standards. But we get farther through the looking glass every day. 7/
Most people on here aren't interested in attribution and sourcing. I can't count how many "look at this crazy thing" I've been sent and you look at sourcing and it's like, "top donors." Someone said a spicy thing and an editor wanted to print it. Who the hell are they? 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️ 8/
This isn't just happening with sourcing, as I said above it's also happening with amplification in our complex ecosystem. Watch below as a quote from Jim Clyburn goes from full-throated support for Biden to a "switch to Kamala" quote -that got far more eyeballs- with one edit 9/
This is happening over and over again, there were times today when I felt like I was seeing quotes get cut up like this to strip messages of doubt and disarray out of larger context every five minutes, and by reporters who normally would never do that. It's a feeding frenzy. 10/
Consider the hypothetical. Reporters hate when pols refuse to answer hypotheticals, but here's why they do- watch below as words basically put into Mr. Clyburn's mouth by a CNN interviewer become an AP headline fueling "more talk of whether Biden should end his campaign" 11/
This is mob mentality- myopic focus on one end goal, Dems in Disarray, Bad For Biden. If it doesn't fit it won't get print. Even NOT talking can get you- Hill reporters remarked on Susan Wild avoiding a question; far fewer noted her appearance with the First Lady hours later. 12/
With polls we talk about herding, when pollsters skew their results to be more like findings from other polls. What's happening in political journalism right now isn't herding, it's a stampede. Whatever doesn't go in their direction will get cast aside or trampled underfoot. 13/
This is NOT to say everything is fine. Everything is not fine!
This is NOT to say reporters are all villains. They're trying to do their jobs and they have bosses.
This is NOT to say they're making it all up. Much of what you read is accurate. It's just hard to tell right now 14/
This is NOT to say reporters are all villains. They're trying to do their jobs and they have bosses.
This is NOT to say they're making it all up. Much of what you read is accurate. It's just hard to tell right now 14/
But the fact is most of the leading journalists in the United States are *competing* with each other right now to break the Next Big Story in the Dems Panic/Bad For Biden genre. Their editors are hounding them for juicy bits, and their standards are being weakened to get them 15/
One thing that really pisses me off is blind quotes (and even on record ones) trying to speak for other people. "Everyone says X" "we're all feeling Y." In aggregate they're giving many people a sense of impending doom.
These people do NOT speak for me or my boss. I do. 16/
These people do NOT speak for me or my boss. I do. 16/
What should you do with this? My advice: BE SKEPTICAL.
Who said it? What's the sourcing/attribution? Where do they work? How senior? Do they know or are they pretending to? Is the story shaped by an agenda? What was amplified? What downplayed?
This is real, it's happening!
/end
Who said it? What's the sourcing/attribution? Where do they work? How senior? Do they know or are they pretending to? Is the story shaped by an agenda? What was amplified? What downplayed?
This is real, it's happening!
/end
Forthrightness demands I update this to note NPR and NBC ran pieces with countervailing accounts from my boss. These were published before I wrote my thread (I outlined it earlier and waited to think on it), but I hadn’t seen them, that’s my bad. They do give a fuller picture-
https://twitter.com/fritschner/status/1808712786760855876
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
