| Published March 27, 2025
The article questions the validity of The Atlantic’s claims and highlights contradictions in its reporting. At the center of the critique is a response from former CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who dismisses the allegations as inaccurate. He asserts that he did not disclose any classified information and clarifies that the CIA officer mentioned in The Atlantic story was not undercover, undermining claims that sensitive details were mishandled.
The RedState piece also draws attention to an inconsistency in The Atlantic’s portrayal of Signal. It points out that in a 2017 article, The Atlantic had praised Signal as the “gold standard of encrypted messaging,” which conflicts with the negative implications in its current reporting. This contradiction is used to question the outlet’s motives and narrative consistency.
Ratcliffe also emphasizes that Signal was a standard, government-approved app pre-installed on official devices. He argues that its use by Trump administration officials was neither unusual nor problematic, as it continued to be used by the Biden administration after the transition. According to Ratcliffe, The Atlantic is misrepresenting routine operational communication.
Now, CIA Director John Ratcliffe has cut down another aspect of the story. Ratcliffe said he didn’t share any classified information and that the CIA officer who was not named in the Atlantic story was not undercover as the story implied.
But The Atlantic actually called Signal the “gold standard of encrypted messaging and calling” in an article back in 2017.
Confide isn’t the first secure-communications app to find popularity among politicians and their aides. Signal, the gold standard of encrypted messaging and calling, is used by staffers who work for President Trump, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.
IMPLICATIONS
The RedState critique of The Atlantic’s article carries several broader implications:
1. Media Credibility and Bias: By highlighting contradictions in The Atlantic’s portrayal of Signal, RedState implies that media outlets may selectively frame narratives to suit political agendas. This raises concerns about media objectivity and accuracy in reporting on national security issues.
2. National Security Perceptions: The controversy suggests that public trust in how government officials handle sensitive communications could be undermined, even when standard procedures are followed. This may influence perceptions of operational security under different administrations.
3. Encryption and Privacy Debates: The discussion about Signal touches on broader debates around the use of encrypted messaging in government and whether it enhances or compromises transparency and accountability. The Atlantic’s framing suggests skepticism toward encrypted apps in government use, while RedState defends their practical security benefits.
4. Political Polarization: The disagreement reflects ongoing political polarization in media coverage, with conservative outlets defending Trump-era officials and liberal-leaning outlets scrutinizing their actions. This contributes to the larger divide in how different audiences interpret the same events.
5. Focus on Strategic Priorities: RedState’s emphasis on prioritizing the mission’s success over internal communications suggests a concern that media focus on peripheral issues might detract from more pressing national security challenges, such as threats from groups like the Houthis.
OVERALL TAKEAWAY
The Atlantic may have misrepresented routine government communication practices to frame a politically charged narrative. RedState argues that the use of Signal by Trump-era officials was standard, approved, and continued under the Biden administration. By focusing on alleged Signal misuse, RedState suggests The Atlantic detracted from more critical national security concerns, such as the success of the mission against the Houthis. The broader message is a warning against potential media bias, emphasizing the need to scrutinize facts, especially in politically sensitive reporting.
Be the first to comment