NBC Exposed: Buried Interview Where Avenatti Witness Flipped, Defended Kavanaugh
What is newsworthy? It is a question reputable journalists always ask themselves, but readers and viewers shouldn’t have to. However, it seems all of that has gone out the window with media bias appearing to be at an all-time high.
Anyone still questioning the “fake news” and general discontent with media narratives of the public-at-large need look no further than this example featuring NBC to understand. It proves the point quite nicely — at least in the minds of some.
The Daily Caller reported, “An NBC News reporter accused of withholding a story that undercut allegations that Justice Brett Kavanaugh drugged girls at parties in high school is defending her reporting, though questions remain about why the network sat on the story for more than three weeks.”
Three weeks. When the truth could have helped then-Supreme Court Justice nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, NBC “sat on it.”
They had it. They chose not to reveal it.
Important context to my and @annaschecter’s story regarding a second woman Michael Avenatti put forward to corroborate Julie Swetnick’s claims about Brett Kavanaugh 1/8
— Kate Snow (@tvkatesnow) October 27, 2018
From later in the thread: Snow admitted it.
Not “newsworthy” enough then, when it mattered. But “newsworthy” enough now, when it doesn’t?
By the time we were able to find the woman independently from Mr. Avenatti, who declined to give us her full legal name and phone number, and fully report and vet her story, the Kavanaugh confirmation process was over and the news value was limited. 5/8
— Kate Snow (@tvkatesnow) October 27, 2018
We also made clear – in the interest of full transparency – that NBC News had not been able to independently verify her claims. 3/8
— Kate Snow (@tvkatesnow) October 27, 2018
But they “had enough reporting” to “fully report and vet” Swetnick’s claims? Even after admitting it was full of inconsistencies?
To be clear – we did NOT have enough reporting to publish the second woman’s account until after Justice Kavanaugh secured enough votes for confirmation. 6/8
— Kate Snow (@tvkatesnow) October 27, 2018
The whole “he said, she said, she said” can get a little confusing, but The Daily Caller highlighted the gist of it, writing, “The woman said she never saw Kavanaugh misbehave or drug girls’ drinks. ‘I didn’t ever think it was Brett,’ the unidentified woman told NBC when asked if Kavanaugh spiked drinks at parties.”
“The woman, who said she knew Kavanaugh in high school, also said she never witnessed him behaving inappropriately with girls. During their interview the next day, Snow challenged Swetnick over inconsistencies in her story. But the reporter did not reveal the interaction with the purported witness provided by Avenatti.”
They had a witness who contradicted Swetnick and claimed Avenatti twisted her words. Not newsworthy? No news value there?
The establishment media went wild with reporting on anonymous sources, unfounded allegations and unproven allegation. Those were apparently all of sufficient “news value.”
But a claim that a witness didn’t see Kavanaugh do what he was accused of? Nope, not newsworthy. A claim that a “creepy porn lawyer” had twisted the words of a witness? Also nope.
This example certainly does nothing to build public trust in the media. If anything, it adds to the belief that establishment media is biased and utterly failing their duty as the fourth estate.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
