Here it is, my UK journalism lowlights of the year:

1. Laura Kuennsberg jumping into Pippa Crears' mentions to defend Dominic Cummings after getting a text from.... Dominic Cummings

2. The BBC portraying Rishi Sunak as Superman

3. This piece of Boris Johnson on holiday in The Sun

4. Chris Mason going "OOOF!" to a response to an ice cream company

5. The Twentyman saga

@TheCanaryUK, journalism and free speech:

Like all news outlets, The Canary produces good and bad journalism. The same can be said of the Guardian, BBC and even the Daily Mail...

I don't agree with some of its editorial positions and at times I find some of the reporting over simplistic. But it also does extremely rigorous, well-sourced and informative analysis that addresses issues often overlooked by mainstream press (cf its reporting on Venezuela)...

What is relatively unique is the degree to which The Canary has been attacked by the left, centre and right. This is partly because of a perception that it has challenged the reach of mainstream media, especially on social media...

Though it's short history is a relative success story among news start ups, the notion that it competes on any level with either the audience reach or agenda influence of mainstream media is a constructed myth...

a myth that serves to obscure the enduring grip of national press and broadcasters over the public consciousness, and absolve policymakers of the need to address this...

If journalism and the press are "the first draft of history," as many reporters and media like to say, then many more of them and their organizations need to have the temerity, intellectual honesty, and integrity to call out what happened in Washington, DC and simultaneously...

...in other places across the country on January 6, 2021, exactly what it was, coordinated domestic terrorist attack, insurrection, and rebellion. There is a constitutional break down in progress, and in some ways it seems that journalism is part of the constitutional crisis.

With all of the reportation around the Black Lives Matters marches and the violence and vandalism that was attempted to be seeded, the news media had absolutely no hesitation in reporting out the incidences while leaving plenty of space for doubt...

...even when it was crystal clear that peaceful marchers had nothing to do with the negative incidents. Sabotage was the specific goal, and the saboteurs were Proudboys and other racist, anti-government, anti-democratic elements aligned with Trump. But equivocating analysis.

...and false equivalency in reporting persists. Thus, unhelpful even harmful dialogue, discussion and propaganda has been permitted to persist to color the goals and objectives of the marchers, unfairly sway public opinion, and stunt some of the progress of that movement.

A PLEA TO U.K. JOURNALISTS

You clearly signed up to the #dontmentiontheschools omertà from August to December.

No questions regarding why @educationgovuk allowed bubbles of 300, no SD, no masks, interchanging classes of 30 and poor ventilation

You refused to ask the questions

Parents watched our children and teachers get unnecessarily infected.

Yes, not all of them died, yes not all of them were hospitalised but THEY WERE unnecessarily exposed in school settings and you sat by and did nothing for FOUR MONTHS

We begged for your help...

We provided the UNSCIENTIFIC guidance to schools issued by @educationgovuk

We showed you how completely against ALL OF THE BASIC SAFETY MEASURES required in all other indoor settings where households mix it is.

We asked you to ask why it was this way...

Until the moves to close one or two days early by schools prior to Christmas were rejected, until the Unions began to take steps to protect their members, YOU showed no interest.

You were complicit in continuing to polarise the schools debate into OPEN vs CLOSED

...when the accurate discussion needed to be;

1. OPEN SAFELY for in-person education provision
or
2. Temporarily provide remote education until number 1 can be done

Why is this? Who gained from this polarisation?

A THREAD about the history of the UK press & journalism, focusing on how the 'radical press' transformed Britain.

I believe we're experiencing something similar now, with outlets like @BylineTimes, @DoubleDownNews & many others challenging the dominant free-market narrative.

A bit of context.

The Guttenberg print press, invented in 1440, changed everything.

Ordinary people now had access to information, ideas & narratives from all sorts of perspectives, thus breaking the stranglehold on the elite's domination.

Gradually at first, there was a profound shift from oral/visual culture toward print culture – kickstart age of reason, & it was transformative, giving birth to the Renaissance & the Enlightenment, & in the17th century gave rise to early #journalism.

People gained access to local, regional, national & international self-expression.

Very early journalism focused on self-improvement, law, medicine, events & entertainment.

In 1550, only 15% of adult population can read; by 1650, nearly 50% of the adult population read.

Early on, more men than women are literate, more upper class than lower, and it takes takes until 1850 for 75% of the British population to read & write.

And this gives rise to the birth of Journalism as we recognise it today.

#Assange Extradition Decision

Joined the videolink to London’s Old Bailey.

There are 12 of us on this link so far, but journalists can join for another half an hour.

Well cross to the court room shortly before 10 London time.

ABC News Europe correspondent @lb_online also on the link

Carrie-Ann Greenbank from Channel 9 also

38 of us now plus Jen Robinson.

We’re in court . Nothing to see yet

holy shit the journalist girl in love with martin shkreli is on clubhouse and the story just keeps going.

"So who's the villain in this story?" these mods are so being so gentle and diplomatic.

"Do you feel like you've been manipulated?" "No. (laughing)"

A gentle question/inquiry about how she feels after losing so much in this process, and she replies saying that it was hard, but she has no regrets, and says that without it she would not have had her eyes opened to how bad the criminal justice & prison system is

Thank god for the woman who is zeroing in on the details of the exact ways he was manipulating her by saying that he had anxiety & panic attacks too (telling her what she wants to hear, mirroring her personal wounds so he can bond with her over them)

Oh my god not some guy derailing the entire room by trying to make the conversation about CLUBHOUSE and asking her how she found the app, who invited her, if she's had a welcome room yet. dl;skadlaksds

1. Was making a QAnon reading list for a journalist friend of mine, and thought the rest of you might find it useful as well – especially this week. Enjoy.

2. On origins, @QOrigins did a good summary piece a few weeks ago:

3. On spread outward, great piece by @BrandyZadrozny and @oneunderscore__

4. On mainstreaming:

5. On mainstreaming, by @AlKapDC:

Want to understand how pervasive media bias works? Read on.

Check out this awful headline from @AP. A gun was found on the scene, there are bullet casings and bullet holes on nearby walls.

This isn't simply an allegation. This was clearly was a gunman.

It would be bad enough if the Associated Press alone published this headline. But because @AP is a wire service, many other leading news outlets have republished this content, often verbatim.

Here's the article on the @WashingtonPost, for example.

And here's the same article, and same headline, on @YahooNews.

The article was republished in plenty more well-known media outlets. Here it is on the @ABC website.

Moving forward, the content of the article is deeply problematic. This is how an article about an attempted shooting attack begins: by focusing on the *response* of the security forces to being attacked.

Never forget that 2020 was the year that Black, Indigenous and otherwise racialized journalists in Canada stopped whispering and said it all out loud. In the order that I remember:

"Objectivity is a privilege afforded to white journalists," @Pacinthe on her time at CBC

Imani Walker, while still at the CBC, takes on one of its biggest names

"For Black women in media, a 'dream job' is a myth," @KathleenNB on her time at CTV

"Black Canadian voices are more visible now than ever — but will corporations act before this month’s motivation wanes?" @MorganPCampbell on his time at the Star

Some thoughts from yesterday. A thread:

I have spent 23 years at The @nytimes, seven of them covering Congress. I made my home at a desk in the press gallery off the Senate chamber. I felt privileged to do so. I consider the Capitol sacred space. 1/

I have been there for any number of historic moments. The funeral of Ronald Reagan, a few years after 9/11, when the building had to be cleared in a panic because the governor of Kentucky flew his plane too close to the Capitol and the police thought it was a terrorist attack. 2/

The confirmation of Supreme Court justices, including John Roberts, the chief. The swearing in of Nancy Pelosi as the first female Speaker of the House. Twice. The impeachment of President Trump. I still have my own handwritten tally of the vote to acquit. I bore witness. 3/

I know that building inside and out. I know (or once knew) where the bathtubs in the basement are. They were put there in to the 1800s because senators didn’t have tubs in their own homes. The Senate historian once gave me a tour. 4/

I know where they keep the Lincoln catafalque – the funeral bier, or platform, that has held the casket of every person who has lain in state since Lincoln. It's housed behind a locked gate in a little alcove underneath the crypt, the circular room underneath the Rotunda. 5/

@StephenFlynnSNP @NHSGrampian

This is how bullies operate, they will say you are to blame but not care about why! Mrs Dickson and her practice has misrepresented me for the last time.

It was her staff who were rude and hung up on me because it was 16:50pm and she was tired.

The fact is, for the what 20th time, holburn medical got my prescription wrong, the day before Christmas Eve after ordering well in advance.

I have anxiety disorder, they know this. I had every right to be annoyed and while I was firm but not aggressive or shouting.

Her receptionist told me for NO REASON to "stop shouting" even though I was just speaking. When I tried to say 'hey, I'm not shouting, I just am annoyed and want help' she hung up the phone on me.

I called back and tried to explain what happens to someone else, who was also rude. I explained and said 'look, I'm working tomorrow, I need to know this is sorted', to this the woman rudley snipped back with zero empathy "well, we are working too"... This blew my mind.

I was not calling their work into question and I was in no way trying to boast, I was just trying to get help but when I said 'won't, I'm not trying to be funny ' this second woman turned it into an argument and hung up! I was left awestruck at this treatment.

This is a thread on @EspinaNonoy ‘s FB which clearly shows what he means by a “mob howling for blood” — calling for summary execution of the killer cop. What follows is his post on the “attempt to twist the narrative of the uproar that followed the Paniqui executions.” (More)

The new lie, he notes, “blithely claims that so-called human rights advocates he been calling for the lynching of the cop and his kid while Duterte's disciples sought a trial.” (More)

“The truth is - and this is so easy to check on social media - the mob howling for blood, including that of the child, was made up of BOTH pro- and anti-Duterte partisans, though predominantly the former” (more)

“many professing shock and outrage at the double murder even as their social media accounts cheered on the deaths of drug suspects and, later, of activists-terrorists-who-the-fuck-cared-about-the-difference.”

“As for the many human rights advocates I know, and they come from the different colors of the political spectrum, I can vouch that they erupted in righteous anger, demanding justice, but not a single one of them even hinted of wanting the killer cop summarily executed.”

Thread: When I started doing investigative journalism full time, I fully understood the responsibility I was taking on. In a sea of disinformation from all sides, I vowed to be a place people could come where they knew they were getting the truth, even if painful.

As time went on and I looked at the landscape around me, I widened my goal. How could I start a new company that was FILLED with people who had the same commitment to honest journalism that I did? With the help of some amazing people, @UncoverDC was born.

We have a set of standards at @UncoverDC that I am honored to say are much different than elsewhere. Straight news, with NO partisan spin, investigative journalism, and opinion. This is what we do at @UncoverDC and we do it really well.

Since we “opened” a year and a half ago we have had some amazing accomplishments. I shared some of them in this post: “One year of Actual Journalism”

We’ve come so far even since this article, and I think it’s because we value and respect all of you so much as our equal. UncoverDC is for everyone. You are all a part of this family. A lot of folks have told me that what I will say next has been to my detriment.

THREAD:
Hey guys, fun thread on #AccessJournalism gone, er, wrong?
Miller's publicist-trio (wait, ahem "journalists") are at it, yet AGAIN helping Miller and propping him up. Of course, we're talking about @jdawsey1 @AshleyRParker @PhilipRucker.
cc: @PostBaron

First, a little 'explainer' on Trump World. One of the things unique to Trump World (and this was a thing during the 2016 Campaign, too) is you want 'helpers' in the media not just in general but for the audience of one: i.e., Mr. Trump.

Trump World people, more than any other ecosystem, uses journalists (who are happy to oblige, in exchange for leaks) to put out narratives they want out there... not just in general but narratives they want TRUMP to read.

This is because, a big thing in the WH, is to put an article in front of Trump. (Trump doesn't read books but he does voraciously read articles.) So you want a report that says how loyal you are to him and then, whoops, that article finds its way to his desk.

Recently, I'd heard (and this isn't any big intel I had -- everyone knows this) that Trump is fuming about how his people have sort of checked-out on defending him. (He's right about that, actually.)

On an almost daily basis I see journalism about (never by) trans people repeating and spreading inaccurate information or responding to a partially imagined reality. It goes without saying that any discussion about trans rights needs to begin with facts!

People talk about trans people accessing spaces based on their gender identity as a big scary dangerous change coming down the tracks. Trans people *already* live their lives and access spaces on the basis of self-ID. No one produces a birth certificate to go to the loo!

It’s also the case that in the trickiest cases like domestic abuse refuges, there are exemptions in the Equality Act. (This looks like a piece about RLB but it’s a GRA/EA explainer!)

There have also been misunderstandings about new perinatal guidance at Brighton & Sussex hospital trust (ie the “chest-feeding” debate)

Phrases like "chest-feeding" are given in the guidance as an example of language that a trans man or non-binary person who is expecting a baby might prefer nurses to use. If you’re a new mum in these hospitals it is *explicit* that the language used to address you won’t change.

For the past 6 years, I & a few other journalists have been trying to get the mainstream press and political elites realize the major danger posed by the radical right. Unfortunately, moderate and liberal elites deluded themselves into thinking that conservatism wasn't a cult.

There is no secretly powerful "Republican establishment" that will fix things. There are thugs, deluded people, and there are quislings. There is no one else in the GOP. Instead of focusing on the radical right's danger, editors wanted stories about Trump tweets.

Instead of calling out the dangerous radicalism of the GOP, television debate shows and opinion pages invited the enablers of fascism to speak and write about how we all needed to give powerful insane people the benefit of the doubt.

Unlike Trump, who walled off the White House months ago into a fortress, Nancy Pelosi did not take the terrorist threat seriously enough to demand better security. She has the budget and the authority and did nothing similar. Now, fascists are on the floor of Congress.

Of course, it is Trump who bears the responsibility for this but the Capitol Police have totally disgraced themselves by not fortifying the building the way that the Secret Service did to the WH.

This is the view of numerous congressional staffers of both parties.