Journalists, Illustrating How They Operate,
Yesterday Spread a Significant Lie All Over
Twitter
Eager to obtain vindication for the pre-election
falsehood they spread about the Hunter Biden
story, journalists falsely claim that the CIA
blamed Russia for it.
By Glenn Greenwald
March 19, 2021 "Information
Clearing House" - -
Journalists with the largest
and most influential media outlets disseminated
an outright and quite significant lie on Tuesday
to hundreds of thousands of people, if not
millions, on Twitter. While some of them were
shamed into acknowledging the falsity of their
claim, many refused to, causing it to continue
to spread up until this very moment. It is well
worth examining how they function because this
is how they deceive the public again and again,
and it is why public trust in their
pronouncements has
justifiably plummeted.
The lie they told involved claims of Russian
involvement in the procurement of Hunter Biden’s
laptop. In the weeks leading up to the 2020
election, The New York Post obtained that
laptop and published a series of articles about the
Biden family’s business dealings in Ukraine, China
and elsewhere. In response, Twitter
banned the posting of any links to that
reporting and
locked
The Post
out of its Twitter account for close to two
weeks, while Facebook, through a long-time
Democratic operative, announced that it would
algorithmically suppress the reporting.
The excuse used by those social media companies
for censoring this reporting was the same
invoked by media outlets to justify their
refusal to report the contents of these documents:
namely, that the materials were “Russian
disinformation.” That claim of “Russian
disinformation” was concocted by a group of
several dozen former CIA officials and other
operatives of the intelligence community devoted to
defeating Trump. Immediately after The Post
published its first story about Hunter Biden’s
business dealings in Ukraine that traded on his
influence with his father, these career spies and
propagandists, led by Obama CIA Director and serial
liar John Brennan, published
a letter asserting that the appearance of these
Biden documents “has all the classic earmarks of a
Russian information operation.”
News outlets uncritically hyped this claim as
fact even though these security state operatives
themselves admitted: “We want to emphasize
that we do not know if the emails…are genuine or not
and that we do not have evidence of Russian
involvement -- just that our experience makes
us deeply suspicious that the Russian government
played a significant role in this case.” Even though
this claim came from trained liars who, with
uncharacteristic candor, acknowledged that they did
not “have evidence” for their claim, media outlets
uncritically ratified this assertion.
No Advertising - No Government
Grants - This Is Independent Media
This was a topic I discussed extensively in
October when I
announced my resignation from The Intercept
after senior editors — for the first time in seven
years — violated the contractual prohibition on
editorial interference in my journalism by demanding
I significantly alter my reporting about these
documents by removing the sections that reflected
negatively on Biden. What I found particularly
galling about their pretense that they have such
high-level and rigorous editorial standards —
standards they claimed, for the first time ever,
that my article failed to meet — was that a mere
week prior to their censorship of my article, they
published
an article by a different journalist which, at a
media outlet we created with the explicit purpose of
treating government claims with skepticism, instead
treated the CIA’s claims of “Russian disinformation”
as fact. Even worse, when they quoted the CIA’s
letter, they omitted the part where even those
intelligence agents acknowledged that they had no
evidence for their assertion. From The Intercept
on October 21:
Their latest falsehood once again involves
Biden, Ukraine, and a laptop mysteriously
discovered in a computer repair shop and passed
to the New York Post, thanks to Trump crony Rudy
Giuliani….. The U.S. intelligence community had
previously warned
the White House that Giuliani has been the
target of a Russian intelligence operation to
disseminate disinformation about Biden, and the
FBI has been investigating whether the strange
story about the Biden laptop is part
of a Russian disinformation campaign. This
week, a group of former intelligence officials
issued a letter saying that the Giuliani laptop
story has the classic
trademarks of Russian disinformation.
Oh my, marvel at those extremely rigorous
editorial standards: regurgitating serious
accusations from ex-CIA operatives without bothering
to note that they were unaccompanied by evidence and
that even those agents admitted they had none. But,
as they usually do these days, The Intercept
had plenty of company in the corporate media.
That those materials were “Russian
disinformation” became so reflexively accepted by
the U.S. media that it became the
principal excuse to ignore and even censor the
reporting, and it also helpfully handed the Biden
campaign an easy excuse to avoid answering any
questions about what the documents revealed. “I
think we need to be very, very clear that what he's
doing here is amplifying Russian misinformation," said Biden
Deputy Campaign Manager Kate Bedingfield when asked
about the prospect that Trump would raise the Biden
emails at the debate. From the CIA’s lips to the
mouths of corporate journalists into the hands of
the Biden campaign.
As the U.S. media disseminated this
“disinformation” tale, nobody — including the Bidens
— has ever claimed let alone demonstrated that a
single document was anything other than genuine —
something that would be exceedingly easy to do if
the documents were fraudulent. "The Biden team has
rejected some of the claims made in the NY Post
articles,but has not disputed the
authenticity of the [laptop] files upon which they
were based,”
acknowledgedThe New York Times. Ample
evidence
corroborates that the documents are genuine.
As for the claims of Russian involvement in the
laptop story, there was never any evidence for it:
none. The CIA operatives who invented that
storyline acknowledged that. The week that tale
emerged, The New York Timesreported that
“no concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop
contains Russian disinformation” and the paper said
even the FBI has “acknowledged that it had not found
any Russian disinformation on the laptop.” The
Washington Post published an op-ed by Russia
fanatic Thomas Rid who
candidly pronounced: “We must treat the Hunter
Biden leaks as if they were a foreign intelligence
operation — even if they probably aren't." And the
only time the U.S. Government has ever spoken on
this question was when the Director of National
Intelligence
stated: “Hunter Biden's laptop is not part of
some Russian disinformation campaign."
These documents raised important questions about
the presidential frontrunner’s knowledge of or
participation in his family members’ attempt to
profit off of their association with him, questions
implicating his integrity, ethics and honesty. Yet
those documents were suppressed by a gigantic fraud,
perpetrated by the CIA and their media allies, which
claimed that the documents were forged and that they
came from Russia.
That is the critical context for
the lie spread yesterday by numerous mainstream
journalists. On Tuesday morning, the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence declassified a
short 12-page
report entitled “Foreign Threats to the U.S.
2020 Elections.”
It reviewed the actions of numerous countries
with regard to the 2020 election. The intelligence
community claimed — without presenting any evidence
whatsoever — that “Russian President Putin
authorized…influence operations aimed at denigrating
President Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic
Party, supporting former President Trump,
undermining public confidence in the electoral
process, and exacerbating sociopolitical divisions
in the U.S.” The New York Times’ largely
credulous
article about this report contained this
admission, one you would think (or, rather, hope)
would matter to journalists: “The declassified
report did not explain how the intelligence
community had reached its conclusions about Russian
operations during the 2020 election.”
Despite that glaring omission, media outlets
predictably treated the evidence-free assertions
from the security state as fact. “Vladimir Putin did
it again,”
trumpetedMother Jones’ David Corn
without an iota of skepticism. CNN’s
Marshall Cohen actually said this:
The report confirms what was largely assumed, and barely hidden, last year: Trump and his allies publicly embraced Russia's disinformation campaign against Biden, met with Kremlin-tied figures who were part of the effort, and promoted their conspiracies https://t.co/Wjhss5U6Nk
Think about that: to a CNN reporter,
evidence-free assertions from the U.S. security
state are tantamount to “confirmation.” That they
really do think this way is nothing short of
chilling. But that is the standard liberal media
posture of harboring reverence for the U.S.
intelligence community and treating its every
utterance as Truth without the need for any
corroborating evidence. It is one of their defining
attributes.
But in this case, many of them went far beyond
mere regurgitation of CIA claims. Well beyond it:
here, they fabricated a claim that report also
demonstrated that the Hunter Biden laptop materials
were — as they claimed before the election —
engineered by Russia. In reality, the report did not
even mention the Hunter Biden laptop materials or
allude to it, let alone claim that it was produced
by the Kremlin, let alone supply evidence that it
constituted “Russian disinformation.” But no matter:
numerous journalists united to spread the false
claim far and wide that the report confirmed this
storyline.
The first journalist to publish the falsehood was
Patrick Tucker, an editor at the journal Defense
One. The tweet quickly went viral as liberals
clicked “retweet” and “like” so fast that at least
several of them likely suffered digital cartilage
damage or at least a mild
sprain:
The claim that this report corroborated Russian
involvement in the Hunter laptop story picked up
significant steam when MSNBC host Chris
Hayes endorsed it to his 2.3 million followers:
From there, the claim was further spread by
Hayes’ NBC News colleague Ben Collins, who
— ironically — works in what the network calls the
“disinformation unit,” combatting the spread of
disinformation (by which Collins means tattling on
4Chan teenagers and Facebook boomers, while never
challenging the lies of real power centers such as
those from the intelligence community; those lies
are ones he amplifies):
With this MSNBC host and the NBC disinformation
agent on board, it was off to the races. Journalists
from across the corporate media sphere spread this
lie over and over. Here was CNN’s Asha
Rangappa:
Perhaps the most embarrassing example was from
S.V. Daté, the White House correspondent of
HuffPost which, just last week, had dozens of
its reporters
laid off perhaps because, while they have
numerous talented reporters, this is the sort of
thing they routinely do, causing them to lose trust
among the public. Daté did not just repeat the lie
but used it to mock those who actually did the
reporting on these documents (note that the section
he underlined in red says nothing about the Hunter
Biden documents, nor does it say anything about
Russia other than it “amplified” various news
stories):
As this false claim went massively viral,
conservative
journalists — and
only they — began vocally objecting that the
report made no mention whatsoever of the Hunter
Biden laptop, let alone supplied proof for this
claim. That is because, with a few noble exceptions
(such as The Washington Post’s media critic
Erik
Wemple), liberal journalists at corporate
outlets will eagerly endorse but never denounce or
correct each other’s falsehoods. For that reason, if
you confine yourself to the liberal corporate media
bubble, and refuse to follow conservative
journalists as well, you will be propagandized and
deceived.
Hayes, to his credit, was one of the only
journalists who helped spread this falsehood and
then quickly retracted it. He first acknowledged
that, upon reading the report, it did not appear
that it actually made any reference to the Hunter
laptop, and then announced he would delete his
original tweet, conceding that the original claim
was false. Note how the original false claims go
mega-viral, while the tweets which subsequently
acknowledge their falsity are seen by very few
people:
With one of his earliest boosters having jumped
ship, Tucker himself, the originator of this lie,
first began backtracking while vowing he would never
delete the tweet, only to then relent and delete it,
acknowledging its falsity. Again compare the meager
audience that learns of the backtracking and
acknowledgment of falsity compared to the huge
number exposed to the original false claim:
I've deleted a tweet that suggested that a recent ODNI report made explicit reference to the Hunter Biden laptop story. It makes reference to Andrii Derkach, a pro-Russian Ukrainian politician who was trafficking information remarkably similar to what showed up in the Post report
Thanks to multiple journalists with large
platforms spreading Tucker’s original false tweet,
it received thousands upon thousands of likes and
re-tweets. So, too, did the tweets of other
journalists promoting that false claim, such as the
one from HuffPost’s White House
Correspondent, and this one from one of
David Brock’s goons specifically claiming that
the security state’s evidence-free report somehow
proves that my pre-election reporting on it was
wrong. Yet Tucker’s announcement that he was
deleting his tweet on the ground that the report
does not make “explicit reference to the Hunter
Biden laptop story” has a grand total of three
retweets.
Indeed, other than Hayes, it is difficult to find
a journalist who acknowledged that what they spread
was a lie. Both CNN’s Rangappa and NBC
News’ Collins simply allowed the tweet to
quietly disappear from their timeline when Tucker
finally deleted his, saying nothing to the thousands
or tens of thousands of people they misled.
Meanwhile, the tweet from HuffPost’s Daté
is
still up a full twenty-four hours after the
key journalists who spread this have acknowledged it
was false.
Do you see how they behave? Take
a look. Prior to the election, out of desperation to
ensure that Biden won, they censored and maligned
this reporting by mindlessly endorsing an assertion
from life-long CIA operatives that never had any
evidence: ignore these documents; they are
Russian disinformation. They not only invoked
that claim to justify ignoring the story but also to
successfully agitate for its censorship by Twitter
and Facebook. So they spent weeks spreading an utter
lie in order to help the candidate that they favored
win the election. Remember, these are
journalists doing that.
Then, yesterday, the intelligence community
issued a report that does not even purport to
contain any evidence: just assertions. And they all
jumped to treat it as gospel: no questioning of it,
no skepticism, no demands to see evidence for it,
not even any notation that no evidence was provided.
They just instantly enshrined claims from the CIA
and NSA as Truth. How can you possibly be a
journalist with even minimal knowledge of what these
agencies do and look in the mirror as you do this?
But so much worse, in this case, they just
outright lied about what the report said — just
fabricated assertions that the report did not even
allude to, in order to declare their lies from last
October to be vindicated. Even if this report had
asserted that the Hunter Biden laptop materials were
manufactured by the Kremlin, that would prove
nothing. Evidence-free assertions from the U.S.
intelligence community merit skepticism, not blind
faith — especially from people calling themselves
journalists.
But the report did not even claim that. And when
some of them realized this, they did virtually
nothing to rectify the severe disinformation they
had spent the day spreading. These are the people
who claim to be so profoundly opposed to conspiracy
theories and devoted to combating “disinformation”;
as usual, they are the ones who spread
disinformation most recklessly and frequently.
The fact that the false tweet from HuffPost’s
White House correspondent is still up is quite
revealing, given that that outlet just had to lay
off a significant portion of its staff. As newly
arrived Substack writer Michael Tracey wrote in
his first article on this platform (headlined:
“Why Journalists Hate Substack”), journalists are
very good at lamenting when their outlets are forced
to lay off journalists but very poor at examining
whether the content their outlet is producing may be
part of why it is failing:
So when you see another round of layoffs,
followed by another round of exasperated Twitter
lamentation about how horrible the industry is,
you have to wonder if these rituals ultimately
function as an excuse for journalists to forgo
any kind of real self-examination. For instance,
why it is that the media organizations they
inhabit always seem to be in a constant state of
free-fall? Sure, there are economic factors at
play that the journalists themselves cannot
control. But it would seem to behoove these
journalists to maybe spend a little bit less
time complaining in the abstract about the
depredations of “the industry”—as though they
are its hapless, beleaguered casualties—and a
little bit more time analyzing whether they have
contributed to the indisputable reality that
huge cross-sections of the public distrust
and despise the media.
There are multiple potential explanations for
this dynamic worth considering. Maybe it’s the tedious
hyper-partisanship and weirdly outdated content
aggregation tactics that much of the online
media still employs. Maybe it’s the constant five-alarm-fire
tone and incessant hyping of overblown threats that
was characteristic of the Trump years. Maybe
it’s some combination of all these and more—but
you won’t see many axed journalists offering up
any kind of critical introspection, because when
the layoffs arrive it can never have anything to
do with their own ideological myopia or other
shortcomings.
Indeed, when anyone, including journalists, loses
their job, it is lamentable. But when one witnesses
behavior like what these journalists did yesterday,
the only confounding part of the collapse of this
part of the media industry is that it is not
happening even more quickly and severely.
Glenn
Greenwald is a journalist, constitutional lawyer,
and author of four New York Times bestselling books
on politics and law. His most recent book, “No Place
to Hide,” is about the U.S. surveillance state and
his experiences reporting on the Snowden documents
around the world. Prior to co-founding The
Intercept, Greenwald’s column was featured in The
Guardian and Salon.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)