A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief-Leader remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
During the first Trump administration, the biggest concern for many journalists was labels. Would they, or their news outlet, be called "fake news" or an "enemy of the people" by a president and his supporters?
They now face a more assertive President Donald Trump. In just weeks, a blitz of action by the nation's new administration has journalists on their heels.
Lawsuits. A newly aggressive Federal Communications Commission. An effort to control the press corps that covers the president, prompting legal action by The Associated Press. A gutted Voice of America. Public data stripped from websites. And attacks, amplified anew.
"It's very clear what's happening. The Trump administration is on a campaign to do everything it can to diminish and obstruct journalism in the United States," said Bill Grueskin, a journalism professor at Columbia University.
"It's really nothing like we saw in 2017," he said. "Not that there weren't efforts to discredit the press, and not that there weren't things that the press did to discredit themselves."
Trump supporters say an overdue course correction is in order
Supporters of the president suggest that an overdue correction is in order to reflect new ways that Americans get information and to counter overreach by reporters. Polls have revealed continued public dissatisfaction with journalists — something that has been bedeviling the industry for years.
First Amendment concerns
Tension between presidents and the Fourth Estate is nothing new — an unsurprising clash between desires to control a message and to ask probing, sometimes impertinent questions. Despite the atmosphere, the Republican president talks to reporters much more often than many predecessors, including Democrat Joe Biden, who rarely gave interviews.
An early signal that times had changed came when the White House invited newcomers to press briefings, including podcasters and friendly media outlets. The AP was blocked from covering pool events in a dispute over Trump's renaming of the Gulf of Mexico, setting off a flurry of First Amendment concerns among press advocates and leading the administration to assert that the White House, not the press, should determine who questions him.
In practice, some newcomers have refreshingly tried to shed light on issues important to conservatives, instead of hostile attempts to play "gotcha" by the mainstream media, Fleischer said. There were also softballs, like when the Ruthless podcast asked press secretary Karoline Leavitt if reporters who questioned border policy were "out of touch." The conservative Real America's Voice network tried to knock Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy off stride by asking why he wasn't wearing a suit in the Oval Office.
While the White House Correspondents' Association has protested the AP's treatment and efforts to upend tradition, it has been largely toothless. For more extensive discussions, the president and his team generally favor interviews with outlets that speak to his supporters, like Fox News.
The Trump team's rapid response efforts to fight the 'fake media'
The White House has also established a "Rapid Response 47" account on X to disseminate its views and attack journalists or stories it objects to. The feed's stated goals are supporting the president and "holding the Fake Media accountable."
Press advocates worry about the intimidation factor of lawsuits and investigations, particularly on smaller newsrooms. What stories will go unreported simply because it's not worth the potential hassle? "It has a very corrosive effect over time," Grueskin said.
Worth watching, too, is a disconnect between newsrooms and the people who own them. Both the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post backed off endorsements of Harris last fall at the behest of the their owners, and Post owner Jeff Bezos attended Trump's inauguration. When the Post announced a reorganization earlier this month, Leavitt took a shot: "It appears that the mainstream media, including the Post, is finally learning that having disdain for more than half the country who supports this president does not help you sell newspapers."
Many newsrooms are notably not backing down from the challenge of covering the administration. "60 Minutes" has done several hard-hitting reports, the Atlantic has added staff and Wired is digging in to cover Elon Musk's cost-cutting.
For their own industry, much of the news is grim. The future of Voice of America is in doubt, eliminating jobs and, its supporters fear, reducing the nation's influence overseas. Cost-cutters are eyeing government subscriptions for news outlets, eliminating an income source. On a broader scale, there are worries about attacks on journalists' legal protections against libel lawsuits.
"They're pulling at every thread they can find, no matter how tenuous, to try and undermine credible news organizations," Grueskin said.
It is well organized. It is coming from multiple directions.
And it has been only a few weeks.
The AP’s Ali Swenson contributed to this report.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here