Respond to prefers-color-scheme dark in app web views

Follow section front redirects in Spectrum

Enable NLP source in PCS for load testing

Switch off the News Alerts Survey Widget when we have enough responses

Poll to determine if new LUF updates are available

Allows the winning A/B test variant to be turned on without Spectrum deployment

Show infinite scrolling sections in Assembler MultiView

Show option for NLP article summaries in Action Bar

Show NLP summaries collection recirc on article pages

A general feature flag for Recipe Features that aren't yet released

Feature flag for media team features that aren't yet released

Use new Orca video player for preroll plugin in Spectrum

Show the snow tracker (instead of the heat tracker) on Spectrum

Dog hit by car loses leg, is adopted by firefighter who helped her

Postal worker finds WWII-era letters, drives 5 hours to deliver them

Strangers help Sesame Street puppeteer after heirloom necklace was stolen

RFK Jr’s ‘history lesson’ on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine flunks the fact test

The Trump-Biden battle over the 2017 tax cut

That time football legend, rig-driving eligible bachelor Biden was arrested

‘Look at the U.S.A.’: A photographer’s reflection on post-9/11 conflict

How Trump’s allies amplify his Truth Social messages to the wider world

In photos: The scene after tornadoes struck Michigan and Oklahoma 

Nats go over .500 the hard way by beating the O’s and Corbin Burnes

These Nationals are pretty fun. They’d be more fun with James Wood.

Baseball can crush rookies. Why hasn’t it crushed Trey Lipscomb?

The next global crisis could come from the sun. We should prepare now.

The FTC’s noncompete clause rule goes too far

The crisis Biden and Trump don’t want to deal with

A college professor wants to use Section 230 against Big Tech

Commerce Department revokes more export licenses to China’s Huawei

Defense think tank MITRE to build AI supercomputer with Nvidia 

Biden back in the battleground state of Wisconsin

In court, Stormy Daniels pulled a Trump on Trump 

In Arizona, election workers trained with deepfakes to prepare for 2024

Carolyn Hax: Family pushes siblings to ‘make amends’ after their mother’s death

Miss Manners: I’m offended by a golfer’s skirt choice

Ask Amy: I want to be closer with my brother. He never reaches out to me.

Social Security has to be fixed. But you still need your own savings.

An I bond is now at 4.28 percent. Are they still a good deal?

Use these 6 points to say no to a college you and your kid can’t afford

Serve seared scallops on a creamy herb sauce for a quick, elegant meal

Seared Scallops With Creamy Herb Sauce

From a forgotten Indian cookbook, a deeply flavored chickpea curry

Arrested U.S. soldier was in Russia to pursue girlfriend

Middle East conflict live updates: WHO says health services in south Gaza will run out of fuel in three days

U.S. signals optimism for Gaza cease-fire as Israel moves into Rafah 

Cruise worker charged with stabbing 3 with scissors on ship off Canada

France tries to shed its rude reputation ahead of the Olympics

Don’t be a jerk at the airport: A guide for headphones

US-VOTE-POLITICS-ECONOMY-BIDEN

In political media, as in love, there aren’t many chances to correct a serious wrong.

But the news media will get just that on Wednesday when Robert S. Mueller III testifies before Congress, months after his long-awaited report on Donald Trump and possible Russian collusion to swing the 2016 election was competed.

Recall how gullible — and therefore misleading to the public — the news media was in March when Attorney General William Barr characterized the unreleased report in a four-page letter.

Coverage of that letter set in place an inaccurate narrative that has been almost impossible to dislodge.

Many news organizations, including some of the most prominent, took what Barr said at face value or mischaracterized the report’s findings.

They essentially transmitted to the public — especially in all-important headlines and cable-news bulletins — what President Trump desperately wanted as the takeaway: No collusion; no obstruction.

Not only that, much of the media treatment failed to emphasize sufficiently that this was <i>Barr’s</i> rendering of Mueller’s conclusions.

And many early headlines and tweets went so far as to state that Mueller found no evidence of conspiracy, although that’s not the whole story.

(While the report did not find sufficient evidence to bring charges of criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, it stated that Trump could not be exonerated of trying to obstruct the investigation itself. And it said that Mueller’s conclusions were informed by his reasoning that Trump <i>couldn’t </i>be indicted, at least partly because of a Justice Department opinion against prosecuting a current president.)

Yet here was the Philadelphia Inquirer’s big, bold headline: “No evidence of conspiracy.”

And here was a Bloomberg Markets tweet on March 25: “Now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has found no evidence that President Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 presidential campaign, the question becomes how much of the news is already baked into markets.”

And the Wall Street Journal — like <a href="http://digg.com/2019/mueller-report-nyt-wapo" >many others </a>— apparently found no need in its main headline for attribution to Barr. It merely stated: “Mueller Finds No Collusion.” (Barr was mentioned in a much smaller sub-headline.)

And the much-watched “60 Minutes” lead-in on CBS stated baldly that the report exonerated Trump.

The pro-Trump media went much further, of course. The New York Post, in huge red letters, wrote “No Collusion, No Obstruction” — and (implicitly) slammed the media: “Two Years of Hysteria End in Trump Vindication.”

And Trump himself was trumpeting just that, and more, from every available rooftop.

All of this put Barr, as the New York Times’s James Poniewozik put it, in the position of “the editor who writes the clickbait headline for all the browsers who never actually read the piece.”

Those who read the full report, or detailed coverage of its findings, or even the more nuanced, less breathless press coverage, would have come away with a far different view.

As The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-complained-that-barrs-letter-did-not-capture-context-of-trump-probe/2019/04/30/d3c8fdb6-6b7b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.95250cc14ce7" >reported</a> in late April, Mueller himself objected to the way Barr’s letter failed to fully capture the “context, nature and substance” of his report.

But by then, it was far too late to change the hardened narrative, or to suggest a more accurate reading, though many have tried.

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, in a MSNBC town hall, said she had three takeaways after an intensive, into-the-night reading of the full report:

“Part 1, a hostile foreign government attacked our 2016 elections for the purpose of getting Donald Trump elected. Part 2, then-candidate Donald Trump welcomed that help. And Part 3, when the federal government tried to investigate Part 1 and Part 2, Donald Trump as president delayed, deflected, moved, fired and did everything he could to obstruct justice.”

It is true, of course, that Mueller’s investigation did not bring what many of Trump’s political foes — and some irresponsible media commentators — were hoping for: indictments of Trump or of his closest associates, possibly family members.

It’s also true that some of the media reporting and commentary over the past two years has been over the top: far too speculative about what the report would say and result in.

On Wednesday, the national media will be in “flood the zone” mode as Mueller finally testifies.

Not only will the hearing be carried live on cable news but the major broadcast networks will set aside their regular schedules to do the same. And there will be special reports aplenty, as well as a great deal of newspaper and other text coverage.

Some damage is irretrievable. Many Americans have made up their minds already about Mueller’s findings — and about Trump himself, no matter what he is or does.

And the hearing no doubt will be heavily politicized by questions and concurrent grandstanding from those posing the questions.

But hearing from Mueller directly is important, even if it does nothing other than reiterate what’s in his report. And this new round of media coverage is important, too, if only because it can clarify and drive home what Mueller originally said.

There is an opportunity here to remove a false, cartoon version of Mueller’s investigation and to substitute a well-rendered portrait of a subject that could hardly be more important to the country.

<email>margaret.sullivan@washpost.com</email>


For more by Margaret Sullivan visit <a class="showlink" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/margaret-sullivan" shape="rect" title="www.washingtonpost.com">wapo.st/sullivan.</a>

Ghosting the News: Local Journalism and the Crisis of American Democracy

Newsroom Confidential: Lessons (and Worries) from an Ink-Stained Life

Georgetown University

Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism

Margaret Sullivan was The Washington Post’s media columnist from 2016 to 2022. Previously, she was the New York Times's public editor and the chief editor of the Buffalo News, her hometown paper. Her memoir, "Newsroom Confidential: Lessons (and Worries) from an Ink-Stained Life," was published by St. Martin's Press in October 2022.

Margaret Sullivan

The Washington Post

Robert Mueller testimony offers press a chance to finally get the story right

Contributor

AFP/Getty Images

Getty

FILES-US-POLITICS-INVESTIGATION-MUELLER

name

Sub: Neutral

IC-JPMC-Global-Cities

food safety neg

shell kws

Congressional Elections

Sub: Political (1)

jb kws