Legacy news agencies are alarmed by Trump’s comments suggesting that press outlets who continue to report false information may be excluded from press briefings.
Mr. Trump stated he was considering limiting the access of outlets who knowingly publish misinformation. These outlets immediately began crying foul claiming his words were an attack on democracy.
In doing so, these outlets were merely protecting their own business models (and their own ability to spin), while simultaneously ignoring their own complicity in promoting propaganda and misinformation in their own reporting.
To hear the legacy media tell it, Trump’s comments regarding limiting access to press outlets who knowingly publish false information represents an unprecedented level of aggression towards the press.
However, we must recall that many of these very same outlets created and promoted an entire genre of anonymous-sourced reporting on Russia-gate; and then, when official documents emerged, these outlets quietly deleted all their prior reports.
Moreover, these outlets actively promoted bureaucratic efforts to undermine election results and framed legitimate debates over social media policies as foreign meddling.
We can’t help but wonder if any of these same outlets ever seriously considered their own responsibility in suppressing reporting on border encounters and economic data before president trump raised concerns about access.
Selective outrage ignores the fact that legacy media has always engaged in some form of gatekeeping as part of their daily activities. For example, CNN devoted much time and effort into investigating aspects of the Trump-Russia scandal until primary documentation became available.
Likewise, MSNBC personalities did not hesitate to use their bully pulpit to encourage bureaucrats to resist certification of election results.
Similarly, Politico’s access-driven model often blurred lines between reporting and influencing insiders.
In each case, the legacy media presented themselves as impartial facilitators of debate while imposing a uniform ideological filter on any issue where there was dispute. And what is notable here is that Trump’s comment simply calls attention to the one-way nature of that relationship.
Of course, what also becomes clear is how rapidly the legacy media pivots from demanding transparency from others to defending their own privileged position within the political establishment when the shoe is on the other foot.
Press Access Used as a Tool
Protests over first amendment rights ring hollow when weighed against previous actions.
How many competing viewpoints experienced sudden decreases in visibility or monetization opportunities during elections while these outlets touted unsubstantiated claims without similar counter-pressures?
