As we previously reported, the Usual Suspects in the mainstream media launched into an epic freakout in the aftermath of Twitter CEO Elon Musk’s release of the first series of Twitter Files last Friday to independent journalist Matt Taibbi.

The files shined a brighter spotlight on what went on behind the scenes related to Twitter’s deliberate and coordinated suppression of the New York Post’s blockbuster Hunter Biden laptop story (and their locking of the Post’s Twitter account) in October 2020, just a few weeks before the presidential election.

While the reasons for the MSM alternately downplaying the story, suggesting it’s “dangerous” that Musk released the info, and trying to paint Taibbi as a Musk stooge at the same time seem pretty obvious, they have of course denied that there is anything partisan behind their reactions to the story, simply suggesting in so many words that they are responding “in principle” to Musk’s actions.

The real explanation, however, was inadvertently discovered in Media World by New York Times media reporter Michael Grynbaum, who noted that Taibbi fell out of favor with Democrats and the media after he questioned the Trump/Russia collusion narrative. Because of that, anything he’s said or done after that has been met with disdain from the establishment types in the press:

The central role of Mr. Taibbi, a polarizing figure in journalism circles, set off its own uproar.

Once a major voice of the political left, Mr. Taibbi rose to prominence by presenting himself as an unencumbered truth teller. He is perhaps best known for labeling Goldman Sachs a “vampire squid” in an article that galvanized public outrage toward Wall Street. But his commentary about former President Donald J. Trump diverged from the views of many Democrats — for instance, he was skeptical of claims of collusion between Russia and Mr. Trump’s campaign — and his fan base shifted.

And that says it all, remarked Aaron Maté, a fellow independent journalist and an occasional co-host of Taibbi’s “Useful Idiots” podcasts:

NYT's @grynbaum on what's behind the media "uproar" over @mtaibbi: he has "diverged from the views of many Democrats", e.g. by being "skeptical of claims of [Trump-Russia] collusion."

Correct: in "journalism circles", you may not diverge from Democrats' top conspiracy theory. pic.twitter.com/IBgiVyCTpi

— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) December 5, 2022

I remember once upon a time when we were told that criticizing a reporter was a very dangerous, undemocratic thing to do, whether you were a politician or just an average news reader who was sick and tired of the media spoonfeeding you their opinions rather than giving you all the relevant info in order for you to make your own informed decisions about what to think.

Except as usual, Democrats and the media don’t hold themselves to the same standards they have others. Us criticizing journalists and media outlets undermines the institution or something, while their criticisms of the press are solely for noble reasons, like wanting to make the industry trustworthy and supportable again (right) by defending it and/or downplaying it when they behave very badly.

Except it’s 2022, and we’re in a time when trust in the press is at an all-time low. Sadly for Grynbaum and others like him, that’s not going to change anytime soon, mainly because partisan reporters at mainstream media outlets have in general shown a deliberate unwillingness to drop their political stripes and simply report the news straight down the line.

This is, ironically, exactly why media figures like Taibbi who march to the beat of their own drum have done so well, and why they will continue to do so, thank goodness.

Related: Media Pounces on GOP After Inconvenient Truths About Hakeem Jeffries Are Pointed Out