It’s so cute when Soledad O’Brien thinks we should take her seriously as a journalist.
Let’s set the stage: Toronto Star correspondent Daniel Dale tweeted last night about the “Trump-clickbait complex”:
How the Trump-clickbait complex works: a reporter asked him if he thought Soros was funding it, though he hadn’t mentioned Soros; he said “I don’t know who, but I wouldn’t be surprised”; The Hill got its #content, truncated the quote, got its clicks. https://t.co/T5TvCctnLm
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) November 1, 2018
And O’Brien totally got where Dale was coming from:
Same as the @axios led 14th ammend craziness. Note: the REPORTER posed it: @jonathanvswan “On immigration, some legal scholars think you can get rid of birthright citizenship without changing the constitution—(with executive order!) Exactly! have you thought about that? https://t.co/EUCyu1xgDb
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) November 1, 2018
That led to a conversation about executive orders:
So you’re saying that NOW you don’t like the idea of Executive power over-running Congress & the Constitution with a “pen and a phone”?
Welcome to Conservatism.
— Rich Weinstein (@phillyrich1) November 1, 2018
Ah, the Conservatism of old… Before $2 trillion dollar deficits and the above-the-fold racism.
Constitution, you say? Currently being challenged with an Executive Order, and not a peep from the the Conservative Orthodoxy.
Comparing Obama to Trump is intellectually dishonest
— Chevonster (@chevonster) November 1, 2018
Really? I’ve seen no executive order. Show it to me.
Don’t confuse rhetoric with actual action.
— Rich Weinstein (@phillyrich1) November 1, 2018
That is her point as well…and she isn't a conservative.
The media is creating news here for their own purposes. It is debatable if Trump does anything with this without journalistic prodding.
— Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D., M.S. (@Neoavatara) November 1, 2018
It’s an interesting and relevant topic that was hot in the mid 1990s, as I showed on video yesterday.
— Rich Weinstein (@phillyrich1) November 1, 2018
I think it is, BUT… Was Trump actively thinking about the policy right now?
I'm not sure he was. Maybe later, but the press, not Trump, made this a story.
The press shouldn't be making news.
— Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D., M.S. (@Neoavatara) November 1, 2018
But the press loves to make news! And the only thing better than making news is making it up:
Which is why it matters when the intv—which was a promo—was shot. Shot a week ago? Then yes, someone (Miller, is what I hear, unconfirmed) fed it to Axios, who saw they got a nugget for their show. And held it. For a promo. That would be kinda… odd.. right?
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) November 1, 2018
What she hears?
The interview was shot on Monday. We write in the piece how the reporting came about. Your sources are incorrect.
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 1, 2018
(Hmm very possible, as I said it’s what I heard, unconfirmed.)
Why no follow ups?
Why are you laughing? https://t.co/r1JGLb3nSJ— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) November 1, 2018
Before Soledad starts asking questions, here’s one she needs to answer:
If it’s unconfirmed, and you are a journalist, why are you saying it publicly?
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 1, 2018
Inquiring minds wanna know. Guess this is the best answer they can hope for:
Well, I am revealing that it is unconfirmed. Three pretty good sources told me, but—it’s not confirmed. And I am not a reporter on this story. But I get it, babe, be mad at me for your poor reporting. (also tell your editor to not put your laughing in the promo—bad look.)
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) November 1, 2018
Oh.
I’m not mad. It’s a genuine question. And I’m now curious that you have three sources with direct knowledge of what happened.
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 1, 2018
Hah. People call me. Just like you, I suspect. Glad you’re not mad. I hope you have a great day.
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) November 1, 2018
Well the three people who called you are not knowledgeable enough to even know the date of the interview.
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 1, 2018
But her sources!
And speaking of bad looks:
Do the rules say it's ok to call a man in a professional setting "babe"? Because pretty sure there would be objections if this went the other way. Incredibly belittling.
— Rebeccah Heinrichs (@RLHeinrichs) November 1, 2018
“I am not a reporter on this story” so it’s fine to share “unconfirmed”/false info from “pretty good sources” in effort to smear serious reporter who I inappropropriately call “babe” is peak Twitter. https://t.co/zNMMBNw4bF
— Danielle Jones (@djtweets) November 1, 2018
Join the conversation as a VIP Member