Sean Davis is one of the leaders of the conservative site The Federalist. He appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show on Tuesday night to talk about what a train wreck the Russia story became for the liberal media.
Here’s a partial transcript via Real Clear Politics:
Sean Davis: Media Did Irreparable Harm To Their Own Reputations With “Russia Collusion” Coverage
TUCKER CARLSON: Sean Davis is the co-founder of “The Federalist” and he just wrote a great piece of “The Wall Street Journal” describing the collusion debacle as a catastrophic media failure. And even that may be an understatement. I am happy to have him join us tonight. As you wrote this piece, you obviously collected what you have been watching and thinking about. How big was your conclusion with the magnitude of the screw-up here?
SEAN DAVIS: This is probably the biggest, most consequential screwup of the last 25 to 50 years. It is difficult to really comprehend or overstate the damage that the media did to the country, to their own reputation, to the constitution. This was an absolute catastrophe.
TUCKER CARLSON: I know liberals would feel that way. But I don’t know anybody running a media organization on the left who is willing to admit it. Just today there was a piece in which Dean Baquet of “The New York Times” and the editor of “The Washington Post” and Jeff Zucker of CNN, all bragging about what a great job they did. How could they say that?
SEAN DAVIS: Why wouldn’t say? They were given Pulitzers. They were showered with adulation by their peers and able to pat each other on the back and tell them that they were heroes. That they’re going to bring down the next president and hold him accountable. There is no incentive in the media for them to have gotten this right. All the incentives in the wrong direction, whether it was traffic or viewership or ideology. There was no reason for them to get this right.
Watch the video:
Davis wrote an op-ed on this topic earlier this week.
Here’s an excerpt via FOX News:
Mueller probe coverage was a catastrophic media failure
Robert Mueller’s investigation is over, but questions still abound. Not about collusion, Russian interference or obstruction of justice, but about the leading lights of journalism who managed to get the story so wrong, and for so long.
It wasn’t merely an error here or there. America’s blue-chip journalists botched the entire story, from its birth during the presidential campaign to its final breath Sunday – and they never stopped congratulating themselves for it. Last year the New York Times and Washington Post shared a Pulitzer Prize “for deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration.” A 2017 Time magazine cover depicted the White House getting a “makeover” to transform it into the Kremlin.
All based on a theory – that the president of the United States was a Russian asset – produced by a retired foreign spy whose work was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. An unbiased observer would have taken the theory’s partisan provenance as a red flag, but most political journalists saw nothing but green lights.
Spot on in every way.