Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Conspiracy Theories and Flawed Journalism
In case you haven’t been paying attention, Donald Trump has once again stirred up a hornet’s nest with one of his tweets, this time concerning the death of Lori Klausutis, an employee of then-Congressman Joe Scarborough. The story in a nutshell is that Klausutis, an otherwise fit young woman of 28, died in Scarborough’s Fort Walton Beach office from a head injury she sustained when passing out due to an undiagnosed heart condition. It has been a favorite topic among conspiracy theorists for almost 20 years.
The medical examiner’s report should have been the end of it. After all, the outcome of the autopsy was perfectly reasonable. But then several things got in the way. One, the medical examiner that made the ruling turned out to be a bit of a crackpot, arrested a decade later for illegally keeping stolen body parts in a South Florida storage facility. Secondly, Scarborough himself hasn’t helped. Here he is joking about the incident on Don Imus’ nationally syndicated radio show while pushing the launch of a show on MSNBC:
That was in 2003. Laughter is a strange reaction from someone who said it was outrageous rumors that caused him to resign his seat in Congress.
The reactions to Trump’s tweet has been predictable enough. But like so many of the other outrages of the Trump era, the anger is either misplaced or counterproductive. Like the political class that wishes to ignore their own complicity in Trump’s rise to the Oval Office, likewise the press wishes to ignore their own complicity in making the truth a rare commodity in the so-called “age of information.” If you spend three years rumor-mongering about Russia collusion theories and the backgrounds of Supreme Court nominees it’s difficult to take your objections to the President’s tweets seriously. In the end the reality of your headline is “Noted Victim of Conspiracy Theories Shares His Own Conspiracy Theories.”
Someone on Twitter framed the situation thusly: There is no difference between a “conspiracy theory” and “fake news.” That, of course, is nonsense. Conspiracy theories are partly based on the experience that the application of the law is too often double-tiered, with one set of rules for ordinary citizens and another for the well-connected. This is universal. Those on the right see privilege born of political power, those on the left see it as being the result of wealth and race.
In that regard, most conspiracy theories are organic, born of curiosity and mistrust, and perpetuated because the ordinary citizen doesn’t have the resources to disprove them. That makes “fake news” ten times worse. It’s not amateur bumbling, it’s professional malpractice. They have the resources and the skill but lack the motivation and therefore the effort to provide the most truthful reporting possible.
All good reporters and the best stories begin with theories and the simple question, “What if…” It’s the ability to follow through and the willingness to be convinced that dead ends aren’t wasted that makes a good journalist.
But there is also a basic flaw in journalism that needs to be addressed: the two source rule. In an era where elements of the Federal Government are actively trying to undermine and overturn the results of elections the standard for printing or broadcasting, an item needs to be higher than that. As the folks at Fusion GPS demonstrated, finding two or more people to tell the same lie in order to get that lie into the papers and on-air is an awfully easy thing to accomplish.
Fundamentally, a functioning press would be able to able to throttle conspiracy theories without breaking a sweat. But that takes trust from the public-at-large, something that the profession of journalism has willingly abandoned in the pursuance of political goals.
Published in Journalism
I would not consider electing Larry Hogan to be a “win”.
It makes no sense. There are no policy gains. The media war and the culture war lost for someone who is a nice Republican? At some point, Gary , you have to decide on priorities.
Have you NEVER advised a client of this????
It’s almost as if it isn’t serious discussion matter to begin with but only distractive blabberings meant to use up oxygen in the room. Some, not I mind you, might question if it was posted in good faith.
You would rather re-elect Joe Biden or elect Amy Klobuchar. One of Trump’s songs from his rallies is “You can’t always get what you want.”
Yep, I have pointed out to them their self-defeating behavior. My counseling to the Republican Party is to divorce itself from Trump.
I said this to you once before, but I am willing to repeat it: If, after all Trump has accomplished and all he has been subjected to, the country chooses to turn its back on him, it will be a matter of complete indifference to me who gets elected. I’ll stand off to the side and observe with interest what happens to the country I used to care about.
How does the Combine’s Fog Machine fit in?
More conservatives denounce Trump for his Scarborough tweets. Hear Chris Stirewalt and Dana Perino at the 26 minute point from today’s podcast. https://radio.foxnews.com/podcast/perino-and-stirewalt-podcast/
The conservative Washington Examiner has also denounced President Tweety over his Scarborough tweets. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/trumps-slanderous-attack-on-joe-scarborough-is-incompatible-with-leadership They write:
“It is deeply unfortunate that certain loathsome individuals chose to amplify, repeat, or otherwise resurrect this tall tale, either as part of a bad-faith, cheap-shot ad hominem argument against Scarborough (as in the case of Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos) or else out of the same feverish kookery that motivates most conspiracy theorists.
“But it is far, far more unfortunate that the latest person to trumpet and repeat this vile slander is the president supposedly leading this nation through a time of crisis.
“Whatever his issues with Scarborough, President Trump’s crazed Twitter rant on this subject was vile and unworthy of his office. Some will undoubtedly shrug it off as Trump being Trump, but one could hardly be blamed for reading it and doubting his fitness to lead.”
Are you still sticking with Trump on this issue? Is any reputable new source doing so?
No one here is “sticking” with the President on this issue. It wasn’t about sides. That is, until you showed up.
I’m thisclose to having the thread shut down.
We also must remember to hold Gary to his prediction of a Klobuchar-Buttigieg win in November.
You have the power to “memory hole” this post, but there is a strong consensus against that.
You can also stop commenting, given that this post is on the second page, and the post will stop being read.
Or you can yell at someone you disagree with.
Choices, choices, choices.
I did predict that very, very early in the process. Of course, Buttigieg and Klobuchar were #2 and #3 in the New Hampshire Primary and for me to call them back in the early days of 2019, against a field that included Warren, Harris, O’Rourke, Booker, Castro and a cast of 24 different Democrats was frankly rather remarkable. Also, their swift exit from the race after South Carolina and their endorsement of Biden before Super Tuesday made an astounding difference. So I hope that you continue to note that I saw them as the most likely finalists, but for Bernie surviving his heart attack and the rush to Biden as the last person standing, I think that Buttigieg and Klobuchar would have been fighting it out at the very end.
So please keep making me look good, by mentioning that prediction that was rather prescient.
You really think that makes you look good?
Wow.
That might explain a lot.
Erick Erickson has joined in. He writes:
“I don’t really care what you think about Joe Scarborough, but no American deserves to have the President of the United States targeting him with accusations of murder. No American deserves the President of the United States tweeting out salacious and unproven accusations suggesting murder and conspiracy. The deceased’s family does not deserve it. Her widower husband does not deserve it. That President Trump does not seem to understand that should bother every one of us.
“There’s no whataboutism here. There’s no ‘two can play that game.’ There’s no decency in this.
“If you really think these sorts of things are justified then you are no better than the people you hate. You have become what you hate. The President, in doing this, has become no better than the Michael Moores of the world.
“It is shameful and gross. It suggests as well that the President is more focused on score-settling than winning re-election and that should bother you as one of the President’s supporters. Joe Scarborough is not on the ballot. Joe Biden is. Today, like yesterday, the President has spent more time focused on accusing an innocent man of murder and dredging up the pain of loss for a dead woman’s family than focusing on a man who could fill seats on the Supreme Court and who is ahead in most polls of the swing states the President needs to win.”
I agree with Erick Erickson.
Well, let’s look at the Washington Post Power Rankings from February 1, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/01/introducing-post-pundit-power-ranking-round/?arc404=true
I think that I did pretty damn well:
The Ranking
Ranking not showing? Click here.
That isn’t the point, but I guess you don’t see it.
And my prediction at that time was “NOT Klobuchar-Buttigieg” which makes my record better than yours.
Except you want Trump to lose, so what’s the problem?
So are you defending President Tweety?
We support Trump’s policies, most of them anyway. The rest is baggage that we reluctantly accept because Trump is who he is and he won’t change. As most of us are, he was a finished product by the time he was twenty. Surely you aren’t so dense that you can’t understand that.
I think that we will have to agree to disagree.
I think that Trump’s lack of character overwhelms his policies. By analogy, I note the following verse from 1 Corinthians 13, or as Trump might call it “One Corinthians”
13 If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.
How does this sound?
If I raise the Dow Jones Average and lower taxes, but have no character, I am nothing. If I appoint good judges but have a corrupt motive and tried to throw the 2020 election by strong-arming Ukraine’s President, I am nothing. If I move the embassy to Jerusalem, but still have hatred in my heart, I am nothing. If I give away my salary while enriching myself in a cult of personality, I am nothing.
You may be right on a personal level, but I know nothing of the state of Trump’s soul and, I suspect, neither do you. That is between him and whatever god’s may or may not exist. But the fact that you would ignore his actions that effect good for the country so you can feel better is …
There is nothing to be gained by continuing this exchange.
And not just THIS country either.
So, except for the fact that it was completely wrong, it was a great prediction?
Well then Trump will get custody of the kids (voters) the divorce will just hurt everyone, except the lawyer who dispenses such advice, although in this analogy, you’d be hurt too. That is – if you really care about advancing a conservative agenda, or care about freedom.
Honestly, with a 94% approval rating among Republicans, it sounds like you are meddling in a very happy marriage.
Well, to be fair he never specified which dimension of the multiverse they would win in.