On Media Trust and Bad-Faith Criticism, Part I

CNN created quite a stir on Thursday with a story claiming that former president Donald Trump had left the incoming administration of Joe Biden with “no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan to speak of.”

Almost immediately, right-wing media critics pounced, claiming that CNN was just acting as public relations for the Biden admin, with the implication that CNN was doing so either out of partisan bias towards the Democratic president and/or out of some sort of anti-Trump bias.

Twitchy’s Drew Holden put together a post and Twitter thread taking CNN and those who shared the story to task and Fox News went hard after CNN. You could practically feel the glee from Fox when Dr. Anthony Fauci seemed to refute CNN’s reporting.

Some of the right-wing reaction was based on other mainstream-media reporting that shows that the vaccine rollout appears to matching the pace that Biden has set for a goal. “How can the rollout being rolling along if there was no plan?” seems to be the logic.

Thing is, that claim ignores context. It’s been widely reported that the Trump administration has limited the federal government’s involvement in the distribution of the vaccine. Furthermore, setting aside Biden’s rhetoric, it seems safe to say we all want a faster rollout — one that doesn’t stop at meeting Biden’s goal, but exceeds it.

CNN’s critics also seem to be ignoring that CNN updated its original story with Fauci’s quotes later, and also put out a brief story containing Fauci’s quotes, with video. This story acknowledged that Fauci’s quotes contradicted the network’s own reporting.

Holden also criticized CNN personnel who hadn’t worked on the story for spreading it, while also criticizing liberal politicians and pundits for spreading the story on Twitter, and doing so uncritically.

If you just read Holden’s thread, you’d think CNN was reporting something untrue, at best out of incompetence and at worst out of pro-Biden/anti-Trump bias.

The truth is a bit more complex than that.

First of all, there’s no real evidence CNN got the story wrong. If there was an actual plan, and CNN reported there literally was no plan, then yes, in that case, the story would’ve been wrong. But CNN’s language, at least in the updated story, is qualifying. Phrases like “no … plan to speak of” and “essentially start from ‘square one’”. That latter quote is from a sentence that ends with “because there simply was no plan” but that is the only reference I spotted in which the article said or implied there was literally no plan, and it could be a paraphrase of the Biden team claims.

Even if CNN did get it wrong, there’s certainly no evidence that bias was at play.

This isn’t to completely let CNN off the hook. It is curious that the reporter, MJ Lee, didn’t appear to reach out to any Trump administration sources or coronavirus task-force members who served under Trump, including Fauci — if she did reach out to other sources and was turned down for comment, she doesn’t mention it. Her only on-the-record source other than Biden or Fauci is Jeff Zients, the new White House covid boss.

It feels, from the outside, like a rushed job. I can’t say for certain, but I suspect that CNN was rushing because it thought it had a great scoop, and not because of any sort of bias.

This despite concerns among legitimate media critics about prioritizing scoops over accuracy. If CNN did rush a story that wasn’t properly vetted/fully reported, that’s a failure and it’s something that shouldn’t happen.

But that’s not “bias.”

Holden further castigates others at CNN for spreading the story, implying that it’s spreading disinformation, but there’s no scandal here: Of course other CNN employees would spread what they saw as a big scoop from their colleagues. They’d do this to promote their colleagues’ work, and they’d have no reason to think the story was possibly problematic — CNN’s news reporting is generally reliable and given past precedent, it’s entirely believable that the Trump administration either had no plan for vaccine distribution or one that was so bad, it was effectively no plan.

I need to note, again, that CNN later updated with reporting that contradicted its own story. An outlet acting dishonestly wouldn’t do that.

It’s also not surprising that politicos and pundits who have been critical of Trump would spread the story without picking up on its flaws — again, because CNN is typically reliable and because incompetence on the part of Trump isn’t particularly hard to believe.

Holden is right about one thing — once the story is out there, it’s out there. Which is why CNN, or any media outlet, needs to have its ducks in a row before publication. It’s basic journalism, taught to any college kid in j-school. And it’s completely possible CNN, in a rush to beat the competition, failed at that.

That said, there’s no evidence any possible failure is related in any way to bias.

Yet, Holden and the folks at Twitchy and Fox News were practically jumping for joy at the mere possibility that CNN messed up. And it was held up as “evidence” that CNN will spend the next four years being soft on Biden either because he has a “D” after his name and/or because he has no orange spray tan.

Fox even tried to bolster its case by pointing to two high-profile mainstream-media reporters who tweeted skeptically about the story. But neither one — Sam Stein from Politico and Dan Diamond from the Washington Post — were critical of CNN. Instead, both criticized Biden’s claims.

Twitchy tried to rope Chris Cuomo into it by playing a clip of Cuomo interviewing Fauci and saying he didn’t buy the report. This seemed to be a “gotcha” moment. Oh if even Fredo calls you out, you done fucked up. Except watching the clip, Cuomo doesn’t go after CNN — he simply says he doesn’t buy that there was no plan. Again, his criticism is aimed at Biden’s claim.

Indeed, even Fauci’s pushback from Thursday is pretty mild. And it’s not unusual for the official line to contradict what sources say anonymously. That doesn’t necessarily mean Fauci or the sources are lying — there may just be a disconnect about how bad whatever plan Trump left behind really is.

It’s a confusing mess of a story, and CNN may have let its desire for a scoop lead to a screw-up. That said, screaming “bias! bias!” without evidence every time a major mainstream outlet faceplants isn’t particularly honest. Sometimes a mistake is just a mistake.

I spent a little bit of time during my lunch hour today looking for other reporting that might confirm or contradict CNN’s reporting. Other than a passing reference in the New York Times, I found nothing except conservative media trying to score points against CNN.

What non-media people often don’t understand is that mainstream outlets often work to confirm or debunk reporting from other mainstream outlets. If CNN had clearly screwed up, there likely would’ve been more reporting contradicting the story, beyond Fauci’s quotes. And that still might be in the works — it’s only been a day, as I write this.

Of course, conservative media looking to discredit CNN is banking on the fact that observers don’t know this. Take a story that’s possibly fatally flawed, make some context-free claims that make logical sense, and prey on pre-existing beliefs about CNN’s bias, and boom — CNN is now painted unfairly as “biased.”

Axios reported today that trust in media has hit a new low. It’s bad-faith actions on the part of actors like Holden and Twitchy that led, in part, to this decline in trust.

More to come on the Reason/Washington Post mishigas.