It quickly became clear that in their attempts to stifle the story with Hunter Biden, two giants of social networks left themselves suffocating.
Twitter and Facebook have taken serious steps to stifle a piece of the New York Post, but have ended up paying much more attention to it than if they had done nothing and allowed their millions of users to share it freely.
Especially for Twitter, if you had to devise a plan to reinforce conservative complaints about his liberal bias, you could hardly do better than for the tech giant to block the Trump campaign account. Not to mention spokeswoman Kaylee McEnany.
Hashtag: # Fail
In fact, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted that the company̵7;s behavior – censoring history and blocking accounts with little public explanation – was “unacceptable.” You got it right, Jack. But then he did nothing to fix it, apparently considering the suicide wound as just a problem with PR. Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee plan to sue Dorsey in court next week.
TWITTER BLOCKS OFFICIAL TRUMP CAMPAIGN ACCOUNT OVER ENTERPRISE VIDEO VIDEO
Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook was only slightly more restrained, limiting the spread of the message’s history with its secret algorithm, while sending it to an external fact-check – the results of which are still missing. Wow, how many negative stories about Trump have both companies tried to keep quiet, regardless of the source?
No wonder President Trump said at a rally in North Carolina yesterday that “Biden got rich and America was robbed … Big Tech is censoring these stories to try to get Biden out of this impossible jam.”
It was a gift from the gods on social media.
And do you know who else overshadows history? CNN and MSNBC, except for a few mentions in parentheses, and Joe Scarborough briefly scolded the two technology companies for blocking the story.
As for the history of the Post itself, it is strange.
First of all, let me say that the business that Hunter Biden did or tried to do in Ukraine and elsewhere when his father was vice president was embarrassing. He has won family ties, which may be commonplace in Washington, but is no less ugly. He admitted his mistake a few months ago in a GMA interview, insisting he had done nothing unethical.
But it was quite full on air during the Trump impeachment saga, and I think much of the public came to the conclusion that Joe Biden had not taken obvious steps to help his son (yes, he got the prosecutor’s dismissal from that, on his opinion was an anti-corruption drive), but apparently looked the other way.
Now, less than three weeks before the election, Rudy Giuliani receives and exchanges an e-mail with Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid with Hunter, in which the head of the Ukrainian company Burisma (Hunter was a board member) thanked him for the opportunity to meet with his father and then VP.
Biden’s campaign said that such a meeting did not take place, then stepped back a little to say that it was possible, but it was unlikely that at some point there was a brief greeting.
How the president’s personal lawyer received these emails is a confusing story involving John McIsaac, who runs a computer repair shop in Wilmington. He told reporters that he is legally blind and believes, but is not sure, that Hunter Biden brought three laptops with hard drive problems and never came back to pick them up. Republican Makisaak says he found some of those emails and eventually reported them to the FBI, keeping a copy when the bureau summoned him to court.
Giuliani told Sirius XM yesterday that Hunter was drunk when he brought laptops. The mail was reported by Steve Bannon, who is charged in an unrelated case.
SUBSCRIBE TO THE MEDIA BUZMETER OF THE PODCAST, THE REF OF THE BEST STORIES OF THE DAY
In addition, the New York Times, which reported that Burism had been hacked by Russian intelligence, said yesterday that U.S. intelligence analysts had picked up the chatter that Burism’s stolen emails would come in the form of an “October surprise.” Just in case, there was not enough intrigue.
The post office reported separately on Hunter’s correspondence with Chinese executives, in which Hunter Biden earned millions from the deal – but these emails were from 2017, after his father left office.
An interesting twist was that two reporters who questioned the Twitter message, Maggie Haberman (New York Times) and Jake Sherman (Politico), were fascinated on the left, daring to mention its existence.
For example, Liberal Times columnist Michelle Goldberg wrote, “Are you really going to help Julianne and Bannon wash this bull – in the news series?” MSNBC senior producer Lawrence O’Donnell urged people not to share or refer to the story.
The best journalistic reaction to a suspicious story is more reporting.
Attempts to erase it from the digital space, as Twitter and Facebook find out, can have big consequences.