It’s not as simple as the “liberal” story and the “conservative” story, either: Across social media, multiple competing narratives emerged, even within broad political coalitions. These reconstructed bubbles aren’t a perfect representation of how people encountered their news, but the partisanship scores allow us to focus on publications’ actual audience - the real citizens of the bubble - rather than our perceptions of their politics. For our purposes, outlets shared vastly more often by Clinton supporters than Trump supporters are categorized as “Highly Democratic” outlets where the ratio was closer but still weighted toward Clinton were labeled “Mostly Democratic” and so on. Rather than attempt to arbitrarily measure the slant of a given publication’s editorial line, these scores gauge the partisanship of its audience, by measuring how frequently its stories were shared by Clinton or Trump supporters during the 2016 election. To re-create approximate social-media “bubbles,” we used “partisanship scores,” developed by Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center. Would outlets directed toward zealously partisan Democrats frame the story differently than those with readers more evenly distributed along the political spectrum? What about on the other side of the fence? We wanted to see how those competing narratives were shaped, week by week, story by story, through 2017 - examining not just broad “liberal” and “conservative” bubbles, but also the different ways highly partisan readers and their less-partisan neighbors might have encountered the story. And to many Republicans, the “Russia story” was actually a story about the Democrats’ collusion with Russia, not the Trump campaign’s. To others, the “Russia Story” was the F.B.I.’s methodical investigation. To some Democrats, the “Russia Story” was that Donald Trump was a wholesale asset of the Russian government. The “Russia story” that developed throughout the year was likely very different from the “Russia story” as it was understood by your friends, relatives, or co-workers, not just because your politics might be different than theirs but because you might have been encountering different news entirely. The dossier does include allegations about Americans and to the degree that Mueller can substantiate them, that might someday become public.Throughout 2017, as social-media-addled minds chased one shiny news object after another, one story was constant and inescapable: “Russia.”īut what “Russia” meant, exactly, depended a lot on where you got your news. Prosecutors focus on targets and, in this case, trying to prove a case against American targets. So the special counsel's office might have the means to fact-check the dossier, but it probably isn't approaching its investigation that way. Mueller's investigators and prosecutors have demonstrated that they're interested in alleged lawbreaking and that they have the capability to dig up granular levels of evidence - they knew, to the day, when certain Russian intelligence operatives had toured which cities in the United States. Might Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller also one day make clear what in the Steele dossier is true and what is false? The FBI already has confirmed some of its claims, according to the House intelligence committee Democrats' countermemo released in February. That doesn't mean the public might not learn more, though.Īnother way might be via BuzzFeed News itself, which published an unexpurgated version of the dossier and which has hired a former senior FBI investigator to look into its claims.Įven though the Cohen lawsuit is now closed, the news site is facing at least one other suit, from Russian Aleksej Gubarev, who is named along with his technology company in the dossier. No matter the reason, the end of the suit eliminates one of the potential avenues by which the factual claims in the dossier might have been stood up or knocked down. Law Trump Attorney Michael Cohen's Secret 3rd Client: Fox News Host Sean Hannity
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |