Independent conservative journalist Jeryl Bier can’t help but be intrigued by the story of leftist members collectively known as Ruth Sent Us posting information on where six Supreme Court justices live. Even Bier can’t help but be intrigued by the conspicuous lack of mainstream media coverage of this story.
As far as I can find, @daveweigel from @Washington Post He is the only reporter from a non-right conservative publication to report on the liberal group Ruth Sent Us by publishing a list of what are said to be the positions of the houses of 6 Supreme Court justices.
– Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) May 6, 2022
Kudos to Weigel and the Washington Post here. Truly. Without them, news consumers who get their information exclusively from mainstream liberal news outlets may very well not be aware that all of this has happened.
Not that we’re ready to throw a WaPo party yet. The bar they cleared is quite close to the floor.
Fox News, Daily Mail, National Review, Washington Times, NY Post, etc. reported this. I don’t see anything else in WaPo other than the Weigel trailer; nothing at NYTimes, nothing from any of the networks. If anyone else finds something, let me know, I’ll correct it.
– Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) May 6, 2022
(Beer wanted correct his tweet, anyway. And be very transparent about it. Because that’s what good journalists do.)
I found a story at CBS that reported that the places had been posted online, but did not name the group responsible (Ruth Sent Us).
– Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) May 6, 2022
“Ruth sent us.” They are three words. Certainly CBS had enough space in its article for just three little words.
It’s not that reporters don’t know. Peter Doocy asked @PressSec about it yesterday:https://t.co/c9SlgU7WR0
– Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) May 6, 2022
We have heard it. The White House press also heard it. But could no one bother to report on Ruth Sent Us?
I feel like this is the kind of thing “media reporters” would be interested in. https://t.co/YDvQuLnACD
– Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) May 6, 2022
It looks like something reporters would like to cover. or It should you want to cover. Especially since so many newspapers are so emotionally involved in the abortion debate, you know?
You must be new here.
– Madlaw (@ madlaw1071) May 6, 2022
Why should you think so?
– Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) May 6, 2022
Maybe Jeryl Bier is just an optimist, okay?
Because I have an eternal faith in the goodness of humanity!
– Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) May 6, 2022
Oh poor summer child.
– Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) May 6, 2022
Hey, technically there is still a chance that the media could do a 180 and suddenly decide that journalism – real journalism – is important again and worth doing … yeah, maybe that chance is worse than the possibility that every single person on the planet being struck by lightning at the same time while doing the Hokey Pokey with the jeans cuts too, but damn, there’s still a chance!
@brianstelter it’s about it, I’m sure.
– Mike
(@mikeflanny) May 6, 2022