Topic: CNSNews.com
Despite spending a lot of time early on parroting its Media Research Center parent in hyping Elon Musk's interest and ultimate ownership of Twitter, CNSNews.com appears to have grown tired of the story since the start of the year. Aside from biased, incomplete coverage of a House hearing in February called by Republicans in response to the "Twitter files," it hasn't done much beyond that.
A Jan. 16 article by managing editor Michael W. Chapman hyped how "Several House Republicans introduced a bill on Jan. 13 that would prohibit federal workers from using their position to advocate for censoring free speech expressed on social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, and on other outlets," adding:
Emails and other documents released by Twitter in recent weeks, the "Twitter Files," show that the FBI and some members of Congress colluded with Twitter over two years to suppress and censor certain Twitter posts they did not like, particularly conservative viewpoints.
In addition, the FBI paid Twitter more than $3 million.
As we pointed out when its MRC parent pushed this same talking point, the FBI paid Twitter that money to complete document requests, not to "censor" anyone.
Chapman also dutifully repeated propaganda from his bosses (not that he disclosed that conflict of interest, of course) by claiming that "An MRC post-election poll showed that 36 percent of Biden voters were NOT aware of the evidence linking Joe Biden to corrupt financial dealings with China through his son Hunter,' reported NewsBusters. 'Thirteen percent of these voters (or 4.6% of Biden’s total vote) say that had they known these facts, they would not have voted for the former Vice President.'" Chapman also didn't disclose (as we have) that this poll was bought from McLaughlin & Associates, which was Trump's hired pollster in the 2020 presidential campaign, raising questions about its bias and credibility.
A Jan. 18 article by Craig Bannister tout an analyst's “5 Reasons Corrupt Media Are Ignoring the Scandalous ‘Twitter Files,’” but this person is just someone writingf at the right-wing Federalist website. One of those alleged reasons was “Reporters Prefer Their Role as Propagandists to Journalists” -- ironic, since Bannister and the rest of CNS are serving as propgandists for Musk by uncritically repeating whatever he says.
Bannister served as the servile stenographer of another propagandist in a Jan. 27 article:
The news media’s collusion with Big Tech to cover up information reflecting poorly on President Joe Biden is a revelation by the Twitter Files document dumps that hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves, former Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said Thursday.
As guest host on The Ingraham Angle, Chaffetz discussed how Twitter documents show media and Big Tech coordinated efforts to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop scandal:
As we've noted, there was no reason anyone should have taken the initial laptop reports at face value given theNew York Post's status as a highly biased pro-Trumppublication and the Post's failure to provide independent verification that could withstand scrutiny.
Bannister helped Musk play victim -- with additional aid from the hand-picked writers pushing those selectively chosen "Twitter files" in a Feb. 16 article:
“True,” Twitter Owner Elon Musk agreed Wednesday, retweeting video and analysis of Journalist Glenn Greenwald, Podcaster Joe Rogan and Author Taibbi describing how the corporate media switched from praising Musk to portraying him as a Hitler-like figure – and how they’ll do the same to anyone who even slightly dissents from their ideology.
Musk retweeted Greenwald’s retweet of a video clip from Rogan’s recent interview with Taibbi, one of the publishers of the Twitter Files exposing the coordinated censorship and propaganda misdeeds of the giant social media platform, prior to Musk’s purchase.
Bannister was completely silent about the shenanigans Musk engaged in while taking over Twitter that may have soured people on him, such as his suspending the accounts of journalists who criticized him, his catering to far-right extremists, the increase in hate speech on Twitter since he took over, or that he ordered Twitter engineers to create a method to give his tweets maximum visibility whether Twitter users subscribed to his feed or not.
There were also, of course, the usual commentary pieces siding with Musk:
- ‘Twitter Files’ Report Exposes How Pfizer Official Colluded With Big Tech to Censor Speech on COVID-19
- Lenin Would Be Proud of What the Twitter Files Reveal
Ron Paul uncritically repeated another Musk narrative in a Jan. 30 column:
Thanks to the latest release of the “Twitter Files,” we now know without a doubt that the entire “Russia disinformation” racket was a massive disinformation campaign to undermine US elections and perhaps even push “regime change” inside the United States after Donald Trump was elected president in 2016.
[...]
Thanks to the latest release of the “Twitter Files,” Matt Taibbi reveals that the Hamilton 68 project, which claimed to monitor 600 “Russian disinformation” Twitter accounts, was a total hoax. While they refused to reveal which accounts they monitored and would not reveal their methodology, Twitter was able to use reverse-engineering to determine the 600-odd “Russian-connected” accounts. Twitter found that despite Hamilton’s claims, the vast majority of these “Russian” accounts were English-speaking. Of the Russian registered accounts – numbering just 36 out of 644 – most were employees of the Russian news outlet RT.
It was all a lie and the latest Twitter Files release confirms that even the “woke” pre-Musk Twitter employees could smell a rat. But the hoax served an important purpose. Hiding behind anonymity, this neocon organization was able to generate hundreds of media stories slandering and libeling perfectly legitimate organizations and individuals as “Russian agents.” It provided a very convenient way to demonize anyone who did not go along with the approved neocon narrative.
As we documented, the people behind the Hamilton 68 project pointed out that they never claimed to be exclusively tracking Russian bots.
