Discover more from Krassensteins' Democratic Informer - Fighting Hate & Lies
Why The Twitter Files are a Filtered, Inauthentic Mess
Yesterday, the GOP-led House "Weaponization" Subcommittee interviewed two journalists, likely handpicked by Elon Musk, Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger. These journalists were given the liberty to make selective document requests to Twitter, thereby spreading any narrative they deemed fit regarding the government's alleged overreach into social media.
Essentially, Musk was able to cherry-pick a handful of journalists whom he believed would concentrate on the storyline that best aligned with his interests. These journalists were subsequently granted access to Twitter's historical email data. The Musk team could then selectively filter out whatever information they deemed undesirable, attributing the omission to the legal department or simply claiming that it was inaccessible. This two-layer information filtration process ensured that only the information that fit the desired narrative was released.
As a result, the Twitter files conveyed a narrative that arguably leaned towards the right. While these journalists' stories did include perceived attacks on the left, the majority of the narratives focused on victimizing the right. For instance, no documents were made available regarding Trump's request to have Chrissy Teigen's tweet removed, which referred to him as a "pussy ass bitch." Nor did we gain insight into internal conversations at Twitter following Dorsey's meeting with Trump in the Oval Office in April 2019, which coincidentally occurred just weeks before both of us were banned from Twitter.
Elon Musk is using journalists such as Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger to create and propagate a narrative that suits him best, akin to how McCarthy is employing Tucker Carlson and Fox News to disseminate false information regarding the events that occurred on January 6th.
In both cases, releasing all documents and videos (excluding content that could harm individuals or dox them) to the public would be a fair and straightforward solution. These materials could be uploaded to an online database, allowing any interested American to access them, including journalists who may not be favorable to Musk at this time.
Americans should be calling for transparency. There is no doubt that some actions that the government took with Twitter were, at the very least, a bit heavy handed, but to make broad assumptions based on an incredibly small portion of data, is both disingenuous and unfair to us all.
Krassenstein’s Democratic Informer is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.