Members of the media raise their hands to ask questions during a daily briefing by White House press secretary Sean Spicer in the James Brady Press Briefing Room on Jan. 23, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
May 09, 2018
While U.S. press freedom continues to decline, "media-bashing enthusiast" President Donald Trump reiterated his hostility toward journalists who critically cover his administration on Wednesday, provoking a new wave of warnings from reporters and and supporters of the First Amendment.
Trump suggested that all "negative" reports should be classified as "fake" and the journalists who produce those reports should have their "credentials" revoked. He tweeted:
"These authoritarian impulses of yours are anti-American," responded former White House ethics director Walter Shaub, one of many free press defenders who swiftly denounced the president's message.
"The president just called all negative coverage fake, and is apparently threatening to revoke credentials unless the press starts writing fan fiction. I always thought of authoritarianism as a slick and stealthy evil, but our democracy appears to be going down via temper tantrum," remarked journalist Lauren Duca.
\u201cThe president just called all negative coverage fake, and is apparently threatening to revoke credentials unless the press starts writing fan fiction. I always thought of authoritarianism as a slick and stealthy evil, but our democracy appears to be going down via temper tantrum.\u201d— Lauren Duca (@Lauren Duca) 1525866668
Responding to Trump's proposal to revoke press credentials over critical coverage, New York Magazine's Olivia Nuzzi pointed out that "his campaign did this to many reporters, including me. It made it more logistically challenging to cover him, but the banned press still covered him."
"He's probably just suggesting this to make everybody upset because he's bored and agitated and chaos thrills him," Nuzzi added, "but it's possible he sees a direct link between a press ban and a successful election."
Blacklisting reporters is just one of the many tactics that Trump and his team have used to "control the media," as Robert Reich outlined shortly after the 2016 presidential election. The Trump campaign's strategy also included berating the media, attempting to turn the public against the media, and threatening libel lawsuits.
"Taking away press credentials because we don't like what they say is wrong," declared Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel on Twitter, urging all Americans "to stand up for the First Amendment."
"Thank goodness we have the First Amendment. We need it now more than ever," concluded former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti.
While offering no praise for the president or his threats, some suggested that revoking credentials could actually improve the critical coverage of Trump's administration.
Jason Linkins, a senior editor at ThinkProgress, tweeted:
\u201cif you strip a bunch of reporters of their WH credentials the odds of them finding out more about the WH increase\u201d— Jason Linkins (@Jason Linkins) 1525873324
Radio show host and Huffington Post editor-at-large Mark Signorile said:
\u201cActually, if you didn\u2019t have credentials, you might stop genuflecting for access, stop sending best reporters to useless WH press briefings, and spend more time doing more investigative work on this administration, less concern about insulting WH, tossing access. https://t.co/I316sZAMsZ\u201d— msignorile@mstdn.social (@msignorile@mstdn.social) 1525867293
The historically cosy relationship between Washington reporters and politicians has long been criticized by media analysts and people within the industry but garnered notable attention in the wake of the White House Correspondents' Dinner (WHCD) late last month.
While some praised comedian Michelle Wolf for "heap[ing] irreverent contempt on D.C. power centers" during her WHCD routine, a contingent of Capitol Hill reporters and cable news commentators--as well as the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA)--condemned her sharp takes on the current administration and press corps, elevating a decades-old debate about how journalists in Washington should do their jobs.
Some critics of Trump's Wednesday morning tweet referenced the WHCD controversy:
\u201cNow that Trump is talking about taking away press credentials, outrage over Sarah Sanders smokey eye seems even more ridiculous\u201d— Roland Scahill (@Roland Scahill) 1525868018
\u201cTrump threatens reporters' WH credentials and comatose @WHCA does nothing. \n\nwhat a joke that "journalism" organization has become https://t.co/WlswnUsD6o\u201d— Eric Boehlert (@Eric Boehlert) 1525868564
Hours after the president's tweet, WHCA president Margaret Talev issued a statement that said in part, "a president preventing a free and independent press from covering the workings of our republic would be an unconscionable assault on the First Amendment."
ThinkProgress's Ian Millhiser responded:
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
While U.S. press freedom continues to decline, "media-bashing enthusiast" President Donald Trump reiterated his hostility toward journalists who critically cover his administration on Wednesday, provoking a new wave of warnings from reporters and and supporters of the First Amendment.
Trump suggested that all "negative" reports should be classified as "fake" and the journalists who produce those reports should have their "credentials" revoked. He tweeted:
"These authoritarian impulses of yours are anti-American," responded former White House ethics director Walter Shaub, one of many free press defenders who swiftly denounced the president's message.
"The president just called all negative coverage fake, and is apparently threatening to revoke credentials unless the press starts writing fan fiction. I always thought of authoritarianism as a slick and stealthy evil, but our democracy appears to be going down via temper tantrum," remarked journalist Lauren Duca.
\u201cThe president just called all negative coverage fake, and is apparently threatening to revoke credentials unless the press starts writing fan fiction. I always thought of authoritarianism as a slick and stealthy evil, but our democracy appears to be going down via temper tantrum.\u201d— Lauren Duca (@Lauren Duca) 1525866668
Responding to Trump's proposal to revoke press credentials over critical coverage, New York Magazine's Olivia Nuzzi pointed out that "his campaign did this to many reporters, including me. It made it more logistically challenging to cover him, but the banned press still covered him."
"He's probably just suggesting this to make everybody upset because he's bored and agitated and chaos thrills him," Nuzzi added, "but it's possible he sees a direct link between a press ban and a successful election."
Blacklisting reporters is just one of the many tactics that Trump and his team have used to "control the media," as Robert Reich outlined shortly after the 2016 presidential election. The Trump campaign's strategy also included berating the media, attempting to turn the public against the media, and threatening libel lawsuits.
"Taking away press credentials because we don't like what they say is wrong," declared Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel on Twitter, urging all Americans "to stand up for the First Amendment."
"Thank goodness we have the First Amendment. We need it now more than ever," concluded former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti.
While offering no praise for the president or his threats, some suggested that revoking credentials could actually improve the critical coverage of Trump's administration.
Jason Linkins, a senior editor at ThinkProgress, tweeted:
\u201cif you strip a bunch of reporters of their WH credentials the odds of them finding out more about the WH increase\u201d— Jason Linkins (@Jason Linkins) 1525873324
Radio show host and Huffington Post editor-at-large Mark Signorile said:
\u201cActually, if you didn\u2019t have credentials, you might stop genuflecting for access, stop sending best reporters to useless WH press briefings, and spend more time doing more investigative work on this administration, less concern about insulting WH, tossing access. https://t.co/I316sZAMsZ\u201d— msignorile@mstdn.social (@msignorile@mstdn.social) 1525867293
The historically cosy relationship between Washington reporters and politicians has long been criticized by media analysts and people within the industry but garnered notable attention in the wake of the White House Correspondents' Dinner (WHCD) late last month.
While some praised comedian Michelle Wolf for "heap[ing] irreverent contempt on D.C. power centers" during her WHCD routine, a contingent of Capitol Hill reporters and cable news commentators--as well as the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA)--condemned her sharp takes on the current administration and press corps, elevating a decades-old debate about how journalists in Washington should do their jobs.
Some critics of Trump's Wednesday morning tweet referenced the WHCD controversy:
\u201cNow that Trump is talking about taking away press credentials, outrage over Sarah Sanders smokey eye seems even more ridiculous\u201d— Roland Scahill (@Roland Scahill) 1525868018
\u201cTrump threatens reporters' WH credentials and comatose @WHCA does nothing. \n\nwhat a joke that "journalism" organization has become https://t.co/WlswnUsD6o\u201d— Eric Boehlert (@Eric Boehlert) 1525868564
Hours after the president's tweet, WHCA president Margaret Talev issued a statement that said in part, "a president preventing a free and independent press from covering the workings of our republic would be an unconscionable assault on the First Amendment."
ThinkProgress's Ian Millhiser responded:
While U.S. press freedom continues to decline, "media-bashing enthusiast" President Donald Trump reiterated his hostility toward journalists who critically cover his administration on Wednesday, provoking a new wave of warnings from reporters and and supporters of the First Amendment.
Trump suggested that all "negative" reports should be classified as "fake" and the journalists who produce those reports should have their "credentials" revoked. He tweeted:
"These authoritarian impulses of yours are anti-American," responded former White House ethics director Walter Shaub, one of many free press defenders who swiftly denounced the president's message.
"The president just called all negative coverage fake, and is apparently threatening to revoke credentials unless the press starts writing fan fiction. I always thought of authoritarianism as a slick and stealthy evil, but our democracy appears to be going down via temper tantrum," remarked journalist Lauren Duca.
\u201cThe president just called all negative coverage fake, and is apparently threatening to revoke credentials unless the press starts writing fan fiction. I always thought of authoritarianism as a slick and stealthy evil, but our democracy appears to be going down via temper tantrum.\u201d— Lauren Duca (@Lauren Duca) 1525866668
Responding to Trump's proposal to revoke press credentials over critical coverage, New York Magazine's Olivia Nuzzi pointed out that "his campaign did this to many reporters, including me. It made it more logistically challenging to cover him, but the banned press still covered him."
"He's probably just suggesting this to make everybody upset because he's bored and agitated and chaos thrills him," Nuzzi added, "but it's possible he sees a direct link between a press ban and a successful election."
Blacklisting reporters is just one of the many tactics that Trump and his team have used to "control the media," as Robert Reich outlined shortly after the 2016 presidential election. The Trump campaign's strategy also included berating the media, attempting to turn the public against the media, and threatening libel lawsuits.
"Taking away press credentials because we don't like what they say is wrong," declared Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel on Twitter, urging all Americans "to stand up for the First Amendment."
"Thank goodness we have the First Amendment. We need it now more than ever," concluded former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti.
While offering no praise for the president or his threats, some suggested that revoking credentials could actually improve the critical coverage of Trump's administration.
Jason Linkins, a senior editor at ThinkProgress, tweeted:
\u201cif you strip a bunch of reporters of their WH credentials the odds of them finding out more about the WH increase\u201d— Jason Linkins (@Jason Linkins) 1525873324
Radio show host and Huffington Post editor-at-large Mark Signorile said:
\u201cActually, if you didn\u2019t have credentials, you might stop genuflecting for access, stop sending best reporters to useless WH press briefings, and spend more time doing more investigative work on this administration, less concern about insulting WH, tossing access. https://t.co/I316sZAMsZ\u201d— msignorile@mstdn.social (@msignorile@mstdn.social) 1525867293
The historically cosy relationship between Washington reporters and politicians has long been criticized by media analysts and people within the industry but garnered notable attention in the wake of the White House Correspondents' Dinner (WHCD) late last month.
While some praised comedian Michelle Wolf for "heap[ing] irreverent contempt on D.C. power centers" during her WHCD routine, a contingent of Capitol Hill reporters and cable news commentators--as well as the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA)--condemned her sharp takes on the current administration and press corps, elevating a decades-old debate about how journalists in Washington should do their jobs.
Some critics of Trump's Wednesday morning tweet referenced the WHCD controversy:
\u201cNow that Trump is talking about taking away press credentials, outrage over Sarah Sanders smokey eye seems even more ridiculous\u201d— Roland Scahill (@Roland Scahill) 1525868018
\u201cTrump threatens reporters' WH credentials and comatose @WHCA does nothing. \n\nwhat a joke that "journalism" organization has become https://t.co/WlswnUsD6o\u201d— Eric Boehlert (@Eric Boehlert) 1525868564
Hours after the president's tweet, WHCA president Margaret Talev issued a statement that said in part, "a president preventing a free and independent press from covering the workings of our republic would be an unconscionable assault on the First Amendment."
ThinkProgress's Ian Millhiser responded:
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.