Worlds Unite

The Epstein scandal is cutting across our information bubbles

Photo by Duangphorn Wiriya on Unsplash

Would Richard Nixon have resigned the presidency if there had been a right-wing media universe in 1974?

We’ll never know, of course, but given the events of the last decade it isn’t a stretch to imagine that he could have convinced 40% of the country that the Watergate break-in was a hoax staged by Democrats to bring him down, which would have given cover to the Republican senators who were prepared to convict him in an impeachment trial. Without the threat of being removed from office, Nixon would have had the latitude to stick around, attack his enemies, and complete his term.

But in 1974, everyone got their information from the same small set of sources, which reported the same news from essentially the same perspective. There was no credible way for Nixon—or any political figure—to escape the consensus framing of media gatekeepers who set the political agenda. Through a frame of reference that was tethered to reality, the entire country learned that the break-in was part of a political espionage ring operating out of the White House and that Nixon himself was behind an effort to cover it up.

The lack of agreement over basic facts like these is the hallmark of our time, perpetuated by a fragmented media environment that allows us to operate within information bubbles of our own liking. If some number of people are willing to believe that a sinister deep state operated by Democrats is covering up a child sex trafficking ring that Donald Trump has promised to expose, well, it isn’t difficult for them to find the reinforcement they’ll need to confirm it.

Which is what makes the trajectory of events over the past week so noteworthy.

The Jeffrey Epstein story is not following the pattern of every other scandalous outrage Donald Trump has faced. Trump has tried his usual tactics but he has been unable to get the story to disappear. He has been dismissive of its importance, called elements of the story fake, berated people who think it matters and filed a lawsuit against a (usually friendly) media outlet that published an incriminating story about him.

Still, the weekend began with CNN’s website hosting a banner headline raising “Five Big Questions about Trump’s Ties to Epstein.” The Sunday New York Times prominently featured five stories grouped under the heading “Jeffrey Epstein Fallout,” with the most prominent headlined, “Parties, Young Women, and a Private Jet: Inside the Trump-Epstein Friendship.”

This story isn’t going away. And here are the two datapoints that explain why.

Most people think Trump is hiding something in the Epstein matter. And almost everyone wants Trump to release all documents related to the case.

Literally. Almost everyone.

A YouGov poll conducted last week finds that by a 74-point margin, Americans want to see the Epstein files. That’s 79% of respondents who say they do, to only 5% who do not.

The same poll shows that 64% of Americans think the administration is covering something up. Only 8% do not.

You just don’t see lopsided results like that in opinion surveys. And you certainly don’t see results like that in our polarized political world.

The Epstein matter has cut through our usual divisions because both MAGA and not-MAGA are—for different reasons—appalled by what’s happening.

Trump dismissing the Epstein evidence undermines one of the core promises he made to his base about being an anti-deep state superhero, so the more Trump equivocates on releasing the Epstein files, the more he implicates himself in the thing he promised to expose. Add MAGA’s rejection of Trump’s defenses to the rest of us who already assume that he is complicit in Epstein’s crimes and you get numbers like these.

---

You also get an unfolding pattern of scandal coverage that bears a resemblance to the feeding frenzies of the pre-social media days.

Absent two competing universes of facts to confound the truth, the Epstein scandal is playing out in a manner not unlike what we saw fairly frequently in the 70s, 80s and 90s.

At the heart of these scandals was a candidate or official who gets caught doing something indefensible politically. In each case they actually did the thing or some facsimile of the thing they are accused of doing. They calculate that they would sacrifice their political viability if they own up to it, so they issue a denial. Reporters do not accept the denial, and dig for evidence that contradicts it. As that evidence surfaces—sometimes in drips and sometimes in bombshell revelations—the pressure mounts for the official to admit to the accusations, but now with the country paying close attention the cost of doing so has escalated. With each subsequent denial, their position looks more tenuous and unbelievable. They try to change the narrative but the story won’t go away. It usually doesn’t end well for them.

This is the trajectory of the Watergate scandal in the 70s, the marital infidelity scandal that ended Gary Hart’s presidential bid in the 80s, and the Clinton extramarital affair story that led to his impeachment in the 90s, among others.

The closest recent example of this pattern was last year’s frenzy about Biden’s age (which contained a scandal element about whether Biden was covering up infirmaries but was largely a story about his ability to serve a second term). The drumbeat of negative stories that led to Biden’s withdrawal from the race was fueled by Democrats who wanted him out aligning with Republicans who had no use for him. Similar conditions apply to the Epstein scandal so far. With the country on the same page, Donald Trump is experiencing a bout of pack journalism where social media isn’t bailing him out.

There is no way to know how this will end. It is possible that MAGA anger at Trump will turn to reflexive support if his supporters perceive him as being under partisan attack. Or Trump could try to ride it out and hope people lose interest. He has wiggled out of scandals that would have consumed other politicians, and he has yet to pull his favorite move of deflecting and escalating. Still, I would note that none of his recent efforts to deflect from less damaging stories have been effective, and the structure of this scandal makes attempts to change the subject look like admissions of guilt.

For the moment, as the Epstein story explodes across legacy and social media, we find ourselves in a place that feels like a throwback to an earlier time when we could all agree on basic facts. Donald Trump almost certainly cannot survive in an environment like this, so look for him to rekindle our divisions as swiftly as possible. His political survival may depend on it.