July 21st 2020

By Leroy Knohl

As we—hopefully--enter the twilight of Trump’s “reign,” it is time for calling out the abysmal job the legitimate press has done in covering him.

In essence, we all know he has been the president, yet the values and behaviors he has shown are diametrically opposed to that which a legitimate American president would follow.  It should have been the mission of the press to expose this on a daily basis, forever keeping us focused on the traditions and norms of our democracy. 

Instead, the press has given Trump legitimacy he doesn’t deserve by covering him as the legitimate president.  And when a member calls him out, his threat to remove that reporter from the press pool has effectively silenced others.

From VOX: “Why isn’t the Times covering rising GOP authoritarianism as a scandal rather than yet another partisan disagreement? Why doesn’t the publication consider it out of bounds, beyond the boundaries of good-faith dispute within a democracy?

“It is tantamount to saying that journalism requires neutrality in any conceivable political debate, that there are no values, norms, assumptions, or practices that the media should actively defend and advocate for, as an institution.”

I have applauded The Washington Post for keeping a running tally of Trump’s lies; it gives perspective to how little we should trust or honor his statements.  The New York Times, on the other hand, has been loath to call his lies “lies,” which makes it hard for the reader to remain abreast.

Again from VOX: “The media must begin to assert some agency over the stories it covers and how it covers them, based on its own values. In discussing journalistic objectivity, Rosen agrees that the media’s work should not be politicized, i.e., produced expressly to help one party/candidate or another.

“On the other hand, he says, media cannot help but be political. Modern journalism was meant to play a political role, to expose the truth and hold politicians accountable to the small-l liberal values that make liberal democracy possible. It cannot remain neutral when those values are under threat. Like other institutions — science, the academy, and the US government itself — its very purpose is to both exemplify and defend those values. Its work is impossible without them.

“The press should always be fair in the application of its values and standards, but doing so will mean making clear when there is an asymmetry.”

The press has so often taken a “both sides” approach, giving credence to positions Trump has taken which fall clearly out of the realm of democracy.  His racist authoritarianism has no place in the running of our country—even though his hard-core 20% of supporters agree with him.

In a word, the press should have covered Trump as an “outsider,” highlighting his positions as against the values of our country and not treating them as “what the president believes.”