Donald Trump regularly bullies and insults the media, and has even threatened general freedom of the press. Curiously missing? Journalistic outrage.
—
I don’t understand this election.
The reasons for my confusion are many, sometimes complex, and ongoing. Much of the befuddlement surrounds Donald Trump, his curious ability to bring otherwise thoughtful, normal people over to his side, and the bizarre reaction of the press to his utterly surreal campaign.
Yesterday at The Atlantic, writer David Frum made an excellent case for how several guardrails of democracy, as he referred to them, have broken down this election cycle. He begins with this paragraph, and I’ll quote it in full, because Frum so excellently captured one aspect of the shocking nature of Donald Trump:
“A long time ago, more than 20 years in fact, the Wall Street Journal published a powerful, eloquent editorial, simply headlined: “No Guardrails.”
‘In our time, the United States suffers every day of the week because there are now so many marginalized people among us who don’t understand the rules, who don’t think that rules of personal or civil conduct apply to them, who have no notion of self-control.'”
He then points out that this same newspaper is now creeping towards a Trump endorsement.
As someone who believes in political moderation, I’ve held the Wall Street Journal in a kind of revered place all its own. The editorial board is scrupulously even-handed, and though The New York Times is the understood liberal counterpart to the Journal’s more pro-market stance, I’ve always held the WSJ in higher regard, simply because their standards for strict journalism and a strive towards objectivity were so obviously more important to them than over at the NYT.
I’ve always held the Wall Street Journal in high regard, largely because their standards for journalism and striving for objectivity were so obviously important to them. But I think that has changed.
|
I think that has changed.
For a newspaper that has endlessly criticized (rightfully so) Russian president Vladimir Putin, embracing now a man who admires Putin’s tyrannical rule seems impossible. For a newspaper that purports to value free trade to now endorse a man who would gleefully start trade wars with Mexico and China, and who views NAFTA as economic enemy Number One… that seems beyond suspect.
Then there is Trump’s foreign policy, a veritable black hole where nuance and knowledge go to be eternally stamped out. Donald Trump questions NATO, just for starters.
NATO.
And The Wall Street Journal is toying around with the idea of endorsing him, simply because he’s put a capital (R) next to his name.
I’d say this is pathetic, but the word just doesn’t quite encapsulate my feeling soup of perplexity and disappointment at this election, churning around like the vomit it is, and not solely because of Donald Trump and his regressive effect on the American people.
Watching journalists and publications you’ve long held in high esteem behave like the worst of unctuous politicians, dropping fundamental policy views and grabbing new ones like toddlers in a candy store, all so they can stay relevant and keep their day jobs…
Pathetic? Well, yes.
I’d also call it enlightening.
The press, it turns out, has as much respect for the integrity of their democratic role as Donald Trump has for them. Which is to say, none.
The press, it turns out, has about as much respect for the integrity of their profession as Donald Trump has for them. Which is to say, next to none.
|
Witness yesterday, where during the course of a press conference Donald Trump casually referred to reporter Tom Llamas, who was present as a “sleaze.”
This comes after months of haranguing the press, not just on his Twitter account, where he has called out reporters and publications by name on a regular basis, but also at his rallies. In case you haven’t had the awesome pleasure of attending one, you might not know that Trump keeps reporters in a barricaded section (one might think of it here as a cage), and encourages the audience to jeer at them.
And here’s the thing: it’s Trump’s right to do it. It’s his rally. He can dictate where reporters get to be, and he can heap vitriol on them at will. This is nothing shocking. Trump is a man who makes fun of women, and the disabled, and anyone who disagrees with him (Just ask Little Marco, Lyin’ Ted, Crazy Bernie, Crooked Hillary, or John Kasich, who had memes of him eating sandwiches explode on the internet, all because Trump took a casual swipe at his “disgusting” mastication). Berating the press corps is to be expected.
But where in the world is the outrage?
Why didn’t Tom Llamas stand up and ask Trump to apologize? Why didn’t he demand an explanation of what made him a “sleaze?’
Why haven’t these journalists taken issue with Trump’s promise to make suing publications that are critical of him easier to do? Do they not understand that puts their job at risk? Do they not get that when a bully goes around ripping into you, your silence and cowering make his sick word vomit somewhat… believable to a bystander?
Why haven’t these journalists taken issue with Trump’s promise to make suing publications that criticize him easier to carry out? Do they not understand that puts their jobs at risk? Do they not get that when a bully goes around ripping into you, your silence and cowering make his gross word vomit… sort of believable?
|
My suspicion is this is largely calculation. Since most reporters identify themselves as Democrats, or liberal, they may be holding their strongest criticism for after the official nomination of Trump, so as to help him get the Republican nomination. That would make Hillary Clinton’s task of winning the election much easier, because Donald Trump is so manifestly awful.
But a warning to all you press members who fancy this plan “clever.” The American electorate is not so stupid as you think. Just as they won’t forget the fiery criticism of Republican foes that said foes later forsook in the hope of a power place, they will also not forget the soft glove treatment the “dogged” press corps used with Donald Trump during his nomination.
If you try to turn it around so as to give Clinton a hand up, whatever shred of credibility you have left will be demolished.
Possibly forever.
So tread carefully, my friends. If you find Trump to be a nightmarish possibility as president, then say so now. Loud and proud.
It would be encouraging to see some outrage.
Photo: Flickr/Michael Vadon
Here is about journalism being used to support corporate interests http://documentarystorm.com/outfoxed-rupert-murdochs-war-on-journalism/?utm_source=wysija&utm_medium=email&utm_camp
No Mr. Anderson, the media is overwhelming conservative and is owned by wealthy people and corporations. Mr. Brechlin is right about the news is no longer news. Nowadays, they don’t bother to do their homework and outlet for the corporate and wealthy people interests. Fox News for a long time was the propaganda machine for the Republican Party.
Hi G! Thanks for your comments. They’re featured in a response post, to go live today at 11:00.
I don’t think these are the responses Jessicah expected.
Doesn’t surprise me. Most of the main stream media is liberal and democratic. Most of the main stream media is partisan and most of the main stream media use their pulpit to bully and what happens when you stand up to a bully as Trump has? That’s right, they back down. I’m no fan of Trump, but I’ll vote for the person with the best chance of beating Clinton. I’m no fan of the media either and suspect most people aren’t. I really don’t mind and suspect many others don’t as well watching them get what’s coming to them. They’re… Read more »
Hi John,
As always, thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts. I featured some of your commentary in a response post, going live today at 11:00. Thanks again!
Trump ain’t got nothin’ on Obama. If they weren’t outraged by the case of James Risen, or Abdulelah Haider Shaye, then why be outraged now?
BTW. I think it absolutely appalling that a significant number of Democrats would still vote for hilary even if she were indicted, and don’t believe that should be a reason for her to drop out of the race. This reported today from a poll of Democrat voters. That’s disturbing. Not so much about Hilary but that liberal voters have no sense of ethics at all by a wide margin.
Hi Mark,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts! I’ve featured part of your comments in a response post, going live today (June 7) at 11:00 AM. Hopefully you can check it out!
There is no such thing as freedom of the press. Unless you want to say they have the freedom to twist the news, report not on the facts but the innuendo. If it bleeds it leads. It is clear an agenda to shape the public opinion is there. On both sides it is a truth twisting tale of outright deception and not telling the whole story, nor do they intend to. You want freedom of the press? Then ditch every news outlet EXCEPT FOR USA Today. You’re probably too young for this but go back and listen to the song… Read more »
They’re too busy crying about people not wanting to see the ghostbusters movie, and trying to claim Gawker media was right to show a tape of Hulk Hogan having sex. Actual threats to freedom of the Press? Pfft nobody has time for that, someone just made fun of Nick Denton on Twitter
As far as I’m concerned, the media can take a flying leap ESPECIALLY main stream who have done nothing but try to influence how people should think. Freedom of press my a**. Freedom to lie, misrepresent, twist … you name it, they do it. News is no longer news, they report their opinions and no more.
Hi Tom,
Thanks, as always, for reading and sharing your comments. They are featured in a response post, going live today (June 7) at 11:00. Hope you can check it out!