Media all over the map of 'stupid' and 'hypocritical' in wake of Musk Twitter censorship revelations
So what do Democrats and their leftist media allies have to say for themselves now that revelations are rolling out about how the Biden campaign conspired with Twitter's top leadership to suppress a New York Post exposé about Hunter Biden's wide-scale corruption and perversion? It's widely expected that the left will retaliate against Musk for revealing leftists' unprecedented politicized censorship and their deceptive front for it.
But as for the revelations, so far not much that looks too intelligent.
Get a load of the sulking resentment of this Fortune headline:
Elon Musk attacks Twitter's previous leaders by trying to refocus attention on the GOP's favorite target: Hunter Biden and his laptop
A major story about political censorship done under cover of darkness, collusion in a party seeking full power over the U.S. whose actions threaten the First Amendment in a way it's never been threatened before, and an act that was so powerful that it influenced the 2020 election, is somehow Musk attacking Twitter's previous leaders? That free speech at issue here includes the Fortune headline writer's actual free speech, too, and all this boob can say about it is that Musk is distracting the public with "the GOP's favorite target"? This reads like a press release from a Democrat operative quite convinced that the First Amendment is not "a thing" for him. Trash the First Amendment, and where does his confidence come from?
Now let's take a look at the headline from TechCrunch, via Yahoo! News, one of the big news platforms:
Elon Musk vicariously publishes internal emails from Twitter's Hunter Biden laptop drama.
Vicariously? Did we just read that right? A major breach of the First Amendment has just occurred on an unprecedented level, and the TechCrunch headline-writer thinks Musk is some kind of voyeur. There's nothing vicarious about it — Musk owns the company, which is a public platform closely connected to free speech and arguably subsidized by government, and is cleaning house in order to restore free speech. Doesn't matter what the cause was — there's an unprecedented collusion between government and Twitter in the revelations, and all this clown can write is that Musk is being "vicarious," as if there's no point to this except for Musk's personal and voyeuristic pleasure. Bzzt, wrong, idiot.
It gets worse. Now let's look at leftist sound machine The Verge:
Elon Musk's promised Twitter exposé on the Hunter Biden story is a flop that doxxed multiple people
A flop? Says who? The most important violation of the First Amendment in U.S. history and a monster viral story on the internet, and they say it was "a flop," like it was some box office dud, and they were just watching. If it were a flop, The Verge wouldn't be writing about it.
The "doxxed" claim, which is what Media Matters, or the Washington Post's Taylor Lorenz, and other dishonest (remember that Lorenz lied to her editors about asking YouTubers for comment) leftists like to do. There was no doxxing here. Nobody's address or phone number was published — some very unprofessional and likely illegal corporate behavior was exposed by a new boss intent on cleaning house. That's housecleaning, not doxxing. The perpetrators of crimes against the First Amendment engaged in de facto illegal campaign donations, and running like lapdogs when Democrats called, are badly in need of public exposure. This is, after all, a major First Amendment violation. Sounds as though these Dems are trying to set a new "narrative" for the rest of the media to follow.
Wired, a top magazine of the tech industry, makes the comical claim that Musk's exposé was nothing more than "tough moderation calls" and a "no win situation" for the
moderators free-speech censors, calling it a "thorny" issue.
MODERATING SOCIAL MEDIA platforms is hard. Just ask the former Twitter employees whose decision to block a 2020 New York Post story about Joe Biden's son Hunter was picked over yesterday in tweets from Substack writer Matt Taibbi.
Or ask Elon Musk, Twitter's owner and self-declared Chief Twit, who hyped Taibbi's tweets, which were littered with screenshots claiming to show internal company messages. Despite their billing as evidence of a history of political bias at the company, the records depicted people caught in a trap that now ensnares Musk himself, who must make any tough decisions about what to allow on Twitter.
The tweet thread, which Taibbi dubbed the "Twitter Files," shows company executives rushing to make a thorny moderation call in a no-win situation.
Those poor babies. It's laughable — not just because these were not tough moderation calls; they were naked censorship done at the explicit direction of the Biden campaign, with lapdog-like obeisance, according to the released texts. Thorny is when cops have to make a hair-trigger decision on a maybe-armed suspect pointing some object in front of them. Twitter's minions are not cops, and censorship is not "democracy" as the Dems like to put it. What's more, Wired noted that some Twitter employees and some prominent radical leftists such as Rep. Ro Khanna, were dead set against it and tried to warn the Twitter censors they were doing more harm than good. Wired repeats the old lie that there's still some question about the provenance of the contents of the laptop — which there isn't. They are grossly behind the curve on that one, taking comfort in the old cover-story lies as a sort of security blanket.
What's the New York Times got about this?
A couple of "Look, squirrel!" diversions, both negative about Musk, and no mention whatsoever of the story blowing up the internet:
So a major and unprecedented violation of the First Amendment, with texts and emails showing political officials colluding on the sly to "handle" negative stories about the Biden campaign by suppressing them like Soviet censors, isn't news that's fit to print? Looks as though they missed that one.
The Washington Post was similar, picking out two other irrelevant and old stories to focus on for today's paper instead of the huge news about the politicized censorship:
Meanwhile, the Daily Caller has yet another tack seen on the left, where various leftist journo-eminentos decided to attack the messenger on this censorship, journalist Matt Taibbi, in this piece here.
What a world this is. A major censorship story is broken, election are affected, the left is culpable, and the press is all over the map, doing all it can to suppress even that story — through diversion, resentment, phony claims about "a flop," and other nothing-to-see-here-move-along dreck and rubbish. Is there any question as to why the press is held is such discredit by the public? A major story breaks, and they all try to claim it's not a major story, either by ignoring it or pooh-poohing it.
Maybe this should be a wake-up call to that small sliver of the public that still trusts the mainstream media. Not only do headlines and stories like these expose a major First Amendment issue, but they discredit the lapdog press even more than it is. Maybe it's time for Musk to start buying up those media outlets and disclosing for us what goes on within those places, too.
Image: Pixabay, Pixabay License.