Networks, Gerth and Russiagate scrutiny

Jeff Gerth’s four-part Columbia Journalism Review series is back in circulation because it argues major news outlets mishandled key Trump-Russia stories and never fully accounted for the errors. (cjr.org) Gerth’s series, published on January 30, 2023, ran about 24,000 words and reconstructed years of coverage by outlets including The New York Times, CNN and MSNBC. CJR said Gerth interviewed dozens of journalists and spent roughly 18 months reporting the project. (cjr.org) The central claim was not that Russia did nothing in 2016. The Mueller report, released on April 18, 2019, documented Russian interference in the election, but said the evidence was not sufficient to charge that Trump campaign members conspired or coordinated with the Russian government. (govinfo.gov, justice.gov) Gerth argued that some newsrooms blurred that distinction by treating fragments, anonymous sourcing and unverified allegations as if they were building toward proof of a criminal Trump-Russia plot. In part one, he wrote that early 2017 stories helped fuel Trump’s “fake news” attacks after some reports were later undercut or corrected. (cjr.org) He also pointed to the press reaction after Mueller testified in July 2019. Gerth cited then–New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet saying the paper had been “a little tiny bit flat-footed” when Mueller did not produce the ending many readers expected. (cjr.org, slate.com) The series landed differently because it came from Columbia Journalism Review, a trade publication tied to Columbia Journalism School rather than a partisan outlet. Gerth is a former New York Times investigative reporter who won a Pulitzer Prize in 1999 for reporting on the transfer of American satellite-launch technology to China. (cjr.org, wikipedia.org) The outlets Gerth criticized did not concede his broader case. The Times told CJR it stood by its work, saying it had “thoroughly pursued credible claims” and that later investigations substantiated its reporting. (cjr.org) Critics of Gerth said his account left out evidence that made the Russia story larger than a failed collusion theory. Mother Jones argued he deflected from the “core components” of the Trump-Russia scandal, and emptywheel wrote that his series ignored large parts of the reporting record, including Pulitzer-winning stories. (motherjones.com, emptywheel.net) Supporters framed the series as a delayed internal audit of Trump-era journalism. RealClearPolitics called it a “post-mortem,” while Media Matters said Trump and right-wing media quickly used it as vindication for their long-running attacks on the Russia investigation. (realclearpolitics.com, mediamatters.org) That is why the piece still travels: it sits on two facts at once. Russia interfered in 2016, and Gerth argues the press still owes readers a clearer accounting of how some of its biggest Trump-Russia stories were sourced, framed and corrected. (justice.gov, cjr.org)