The media are successfully making the Hunter Biden story disappear

In the pre-modern era, a reputable mainstream news outlet would have reported in a straightforward fashion that Trump's claimed to have compromising information about Joe Biden.  It would then have pressed Biden's team for information.  The same media would have reported that a former Hunter Biden business associate was corroborating the compromising information and again would have queried Biden.  Our media, though, are disreputable.  They know that their audience lives in a bubble and will not burst that bubble with information about Biden's potential corruption.

When the story about Hunter Biden's hard drive appeared, several mainstream media outlets reported on it only to dismiss it, without evidence, as Russian disinformation.  Even after the FBI and DOJ confirmed that the hard drive was legitimate and emails emerged showing that Hunter Biden's attorney tried to recover it, the claim about Russian collusion continued unabated.

National Public Radio even sought higher moral ground.  It didn't stoop to do radio segments asserting that the hard drive was nothing more than "Russian disinformation."  Instead, it refused to report on the story at all and cited "Russian disinformation" as a legitimate reason to say nothing:

(The reference to Russian disinformation is contained in the linked "newsletter" identified in the tweet.)

On Thursday, the heat ratcheted up on the mainstream media when Tony Bobulinski, who was indubitably a Hunter Biden business associate, made a statement identifying Joe Biden as a secret partner in a deal with a Chinese company that had ties to the communist government and the military.

Even worse, Bobulinksi came bearing documents and cell phones, which he proceeded to turn over to the FBI.  (Let's hope Bobulinksi made copies of everything.  The FBI already tried to "disappear" the hard drive last December, and it may do the same with the new information.)

Unless the media were prepared to accuse Tony Bobulinski, a retired Navy veteran, of being a Russian asset, his claims were going to be harder to deny.  This required a change of plans.

Several media outlets decided to do something audacious: they would ignore Bobulinski entirely.  If they didn't say anything, he wouldn't exist.  Thus, as of 11:59 P.M. E.T. on October 23, these are the search results for Bobulinski's name at the New York Times, CNN, NPR, and MSNBC:

The only major outlet (so far) that took a different approach is the Washington Post.  It wrote four articles discussing Bobulinski.  None is a news article that states facts.  Instead, all are partisan attacks on the entire Hunter Biden narrative:

Maybe I'm naïve, but I find it exceedingly peculiar when institutions that have held themselves out for decades as news outfits decide to bury a story entirely.  I'm not the first person to notice that the MSM is putting to the test the hackneyed philosophical question that asks, "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

The MSM's variation is, "If the media make no mention whatsoever of a newsworthy event, does that event exist?"  It's up to us to make sure the answer to that last question is a resounding "yes!"

Image: Man covering his eyes by Padli Pradana.  Free to use.

In the pre-modern era, a reputable mainstream news outlet would have reported in a straightforward fashion that Trump's claimed to have compromising information about Joe Biden.  It would then have pressed Biden's team for information.  The same media would have reported that a former Hunter Biden business associate was corroborating the compromising information and again would have queried Biden.  Our media, though, are disreputable.  They know that their audience lives in a bubble and will not burst that bubble with information about Biden's potential corruption.

When the story about Hunter Biden's hard drive appeared, several mainstream media outlets reported on it only to dismiss it, without evidence, as Russian disinformation.  Even after the FBI and DOJ confirmed that the hard drive was legitimate and emails emerged showing that Hunter Biden's attorney tried to recover it, the claim about Russian collusion continued unabated.

National Public Radio even sought higher moral ground.  It didn't stoop to do radio segments asserting that the hard drive was nothing more than "Russian disinformation."  Instead, it refused to report on the story at all and cited "Russian disinformation" as a legitimate reason to say nothing:

(The reference to Russian disinformation is contained in the linked "newsletter" identified in the tweet.)

On Thursday, the heat ratcheted up on the mainstream media when Tony Bobulinski, who was indubitably a Hunter Biden business associate, made a statement identifying Joe Biden as a secret partner in a deal with a Chinese company that had ties to the communist government and the military.

Even worse, Bobulinksi came bearing documents and cell phones, which he proceeded to turn over to the FBI.  (Let's hope Bobulinksi made copies of everything.  The FBI already tried to "disappear" the hard drive last December, and it may do the same with the new information.)

Unless the media were prepared to accuse Tony Bobulinski, a retired Navy veteran, of being a Russian asset, his claims were going to be harder to deny.  This required a change of plans.

Several media outlets decided to do something audacious: they would ignore Bobulinski entirely.  If they didn't say anything, he wouldn't exist.  Thus, as of 11:59 P.M. E.T. on October 23, these are the search results for Bobulinski's name at the New York Times, CNN, NPR, and MSNBC:

The only major outlet (so far) that took a different approach is the Washington Post.  It wrote four articles discussing Bobulinski.  None is a news article that states facts.  Instead, all are partisan attacks on the entire Hunter Biden narrative:

Maybe I'm naïve, but I find it exceedingly peculiar when institutions that have held themselves out for decades as news outfits decide to bury a story entirely.  I'm not the first person to notice that the MSM is putting to the test the hackneyed philosophical question that asks, "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

The MSM's variation is, "If the media make no mention whatsoever of a newsworthy event, does that event exist?"  It's up to us to make sure the answer to that last question is a resounding "yes!"

Image: Man covering his eyes by Padli Pradana.  Free to use.