It seems some media outlets have a new narrative after admitting that the Hunter Biden laptop is legit after all. According to Atlantic Magazine editor and Pulitzer Prize winner Anne Applebaum, the story never mattered because it was simply uninteresting and “totally irrelevant” to her. Strangely, however, he did once. Applebaum pushed the false narrative as she criticized others for posting “Russian disinformation” and using the Hunter Biden story as an example. It only became uninteresting when it turned out to be true. The only convincing claim, however, is that it was simply not considered “relevant”. What was clearly relevant to Twitter and most media was the election of Joe Biden. Otherwise, as shown Gaston de La Toucheit’s a matter of boredom.
Applebaum was at my alma mater, the University of Chicago, for disinformation and the erosion of democracy conference Wednesday. The conference emerged largely as an echo chamber, underwhelming programming for UChicago which is known for valuing a diversity of opinions. Applebaum criticized Fox and its viewers: “Those who live outside the Fox News bubble and intend to stay there, of course, don’t need to learn anything.” (For the record, I work as a legal analyst at Fox).
That’s when University of Chicago student Daniel Schmidt delivered a haystack after quoting his dig:
“A poll later after that found that if voters knew the contents of the laptop, 16% of Joe Biden voters would have acted differently. “Do you think the media acted inappropriately when they immediately dismissed Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation, and what can we learn from that to ensure that what we call disinformation is really from misinformation, not reality?”
Applebaum responded by saying she really didn’t care if the laptop was legit because she didn’t find it interesting.
“My problem with Hunter Biden’s laptop is that I think it’s totally irrelevant,” she said. “I mean, it’s not if it’s misinformation… I didn’t think Hunter Biden’s business dealings had anything to do with who should be President of the United States. “
So if the Biden family was engaged in selling access to foreign interests, it really has nothing to do with the President of the United States. It is not interesting that there are references to the knowledge or involvement of Joe Biden and the possible profits of the millions that pass through his son. It doesn’t matter that Hunter is shown tell his daughter Naomi: “I hope you can all do what I did and pay for everything for this whole family for 30 years. It’s really difficult. But don’t worry, unlike Pop [Joe]I won’t force you to give me half your salary.
It’s all so uninteresting.
Nonetheless, Applebaum found it interesting that others are pushing “misinformation.” Russian disinformation has been at the center of his work and she called on Facebook to arrest those who are “spreading lies” and to work to “repair the terrible damage done by Facebook and other forms of social media” by allowing people to express themselves freely on their sites. Applebaum has repeatedly objected to how “far-right television stations, then repeated and amplified in cyberspace, create an alternate reality.” However, when the left has killed off legitimate history before an election, that alternate reality just isn’t interesting.
It turns out, however, that the Hunter Biden scandal was relevant when the media dismissed it as Russian disinformation. For example, in a column titled “the Science Manufacturing Americans Hurt their own country,Applebaum was obsessed with how everyone had to work to kill stories like the Hunter Biden ‘saga’. Indeed, Applebaum berated Americans for not being interested enough:
“Russian disinformation works because Americans let it work and because those same Americans no longer care about the harm they are doing to their country.
You can argue, of course, that these 2020 efforts need not be taken seriously, because they failed. Biden won. At least half of the population did not believe the false accusations or were not influenced by them. The Hunter Biden saga has faded. But that misses the more insidious, longer-term effect of these kinds of games—or rather, the insidious, long-term effect of the behavior of Americans who play them.
Applebaum now insists she never really “cared” about the story or whether a true story was suppressed by the media before the election. It doesn’t seem like misinformation. It’s just irrelevant information.
I once wrote a column on the first anniversary of Hunter Biden laptop history that marveled at the Biden family’s success in wiping out the scandal ahead of the 2020 election. It’s been analogous to Houdini doing disappear his 10,000 pound elephant Jennie in his act. Biden’s trick, however, happened live in front of an audience of millions.
The elephant was not difficult to see. The trick worked because he knew people didn’t want to see him.
The key to the trick was to involve the media in the original act so that the reporters were invested in the illusion. It’s like calling spectators on stage to watch the performance. Journalists must insist that there was nothing to see or they must admit that they are part of the original deception. Indeed, earlier writers like Applebaum accused those who saw an elephant of being dupes and liars.
Well, now that the elephant is back, Applebaum wants everyone to know that she was never really into elephants.