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.
My favorite take came from @nytimes, who appeared outraged that…Trump didn’t wear a hairnet.
No, really. They included it in the subtitle.
@NBCNews went with “pre-selected customers,” as if perhaps anyone believed Trump just slipped into the kitchen.
Why does the press need to attack everything Trump does with such gusto?
I mean, @MSNBC brought on an elected official to provide a real-time reaction to…Trump handing out McDonald’s french fries.
As others have pointed out, what Trump did was basically just the Iowa State Fair in miniature.
But to @RollingStone, it was a “bizarre attempt to troll” Trump’s opponent.
I don’t think regular people saw it as bizarre at all.
Going a step further, @CNBC said that Harris’s campaign “scoffs” at the “stunt.”
Take that, Trump! She’s scoffing!
Feast your eyes on this cope from @NYMag.
Again, no one is forcing them to cover this!!
“Surreal footage” @thedailybeast declared.
I think the media’s befuddlement about the wisdom of this says much more about them than Trump.
What would we do without these guys?
This @washingtonpost headline is just dripping with disdain — how dare Trump not address the minimum wage during his “stage-managed campaign stop”?
And that subtitle sentiment, that the problem with Harris’s baseless claim that she worked at McDonald’s isn’t the issue, just Trump’s claim she didn’t that supposedly lacks evidence, was all over the place. Here’s @nytimes @Forbes @latimes & @AP
Do they know how logic works?
You might think that such a silly story would quickly move from the headlines.
You’d be mistaken. On Day 2 of the McDonald’s Election, we got even more unhinged takes. Here’s @CNN, @nytimes, @qz and @MSNBC.
You’ve just gotta read the headlines.
@AP just covering itself in glory here.
Why did the public need this detail, @brianstelter? What does this add, on the eve of an election?
I don’t usually include internet randos these days but some of these takes were just too much to leave out.
Trump has broken the brains of @RonFilipkowski, @AaronParnas (“YIKES”), @Keith Olbermann (you knew that) and former thread favorite @SethAbramson.
I didn’t expect to say this, but I think the best analysis of this kerfuffle comes from…@cenkuygur.
Trump looks like a real person. The media look detached from real people.
But why? Why did the media feel compelled to spend so much ink trying to dunk on Trump over something so silly, so anodyne?
Didn’t they realize all it did was amplify what he was trying to do?
This all may seem like nonsense. And it is, in a sense.
But it’s also clarifying. The media’s inability to tolerate anything Trump says or does, and their rush to attack every example, puts their bias on display in a way that couldn’t be more obvious.
In this case it was something trivial.
In countless other cases, it was something trivial. Or something misleading.
What matters is the default response to a former POTUS, who may well be the next one, is head-spinning outrage.
How can that make quality news coverage?
It doesn’t. What it does make is outrage porn masquerading as media analysis.
When that becomes the dominant thread of media coverage when it comes to anything a former (and maybe future) president touches, as it has with Trump, it makes a mockery of the profession.
So to those who lament — as I do! — the loss of faith in the media, let me point you to the forces that have caused that erosion. @ChrisCillizza
And, I’ve gotta say, whoever’s idea it was to do this, bravo.
The fry cook cameo took Harris’s birthday (!!) and turned it into a multi-day media cycle of the press highlighting their bias and demeaning everyday Americans, while making Trump look, well, normal.
The media has to be better than this if they want to restore any semblance of trust.
The prospects of that don’t look good.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Biden’s pardoning of his son Hunter says an enormous amount about the president’s views of justice.
But it also says a lot about the willingness of the mainstream media—the nation’s noble fact checking corps—to repeat bogus claims that suit Democrats.
Remember? ⤵️
For starters, let’s revisit the coverage of how Biden wouldn’t do what he just did.
Biden said he wouldn’t pardon his son, no way. He would trust our legal system.
The media repeated it at every turn, without a shred of incredulity.
Here’s @washingtonpost
Seemingly every outlet did the same. @CNN had a couple of my favorites.
Look at the lede in on this first one.
The media’s job isn’t to simply repeat what politicians tell them. Whatever happened to “defenders of our democracy” and all that?
The news that MSNBC may soon have a new owner (and that it might be a certain X power user) compelled me to finally open my “MSNBC conspiracy theories” screenshot folder and, woo boy, there are a lot.
If you’d like to revisit them, buckle up, and follow along. ⤵️
There’s nowhere better to start than with Russiagate.
Do you remember the promotion from @chrislhayes, @MalcolmNance, @maddow and others at @MSNBC that perhaps Donald Trump was a Russian agent?
I, for one, will not be forgetting.
But there was plenty of other insanity from the gang at MSNBC about Russiagate.
Here are just a couple.
The first seems apropos with Trump again picking a cabinet.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Or perhaps Obama’s former HHS Secretary, Sylvia Matthews Burwell, who had just finished her stint lobbying for Walmart.
Or Donna Shalala, Clinton’s former head of HHS, whose credentials were as a university administrator and feminist.