This is for the male reporters: The next time trump treats a woman reporter like dirt, ovary up and ask the EXACT. SAME. QUESTION. she just asked. If you can't do that, quit. People who enable misogynists are worse than the misogynists.
Ovaries are bad-ass. The male equivalents are pretty damn wimpy, right? I've also noticed that tacotrump is a serious coward and won't insult male reporters the same way - he just ends the question session and runs off.
I’m all for running the things Trump says if it’s in the frame “WTF is wrong with this guy.” Without ellipses, without paraphrasing — let people know that this guy can’t get through a sentence without retreating to his safe topics of lying about 2020, lying about the economy, and racism and sexual harassment.
But anyone who starts a headline or an alert with “Trump says …” and treats it like an actual statement from an actual president — yeah. Reevaluate all your choices in life.
I was thinking a bullet list in the bottom corner of a page (web or print), with the heading like "Trump's Daily Distractions." Yes, I want to know what he's doing to distract us, but I just want to know what they are so I can skip past blown-up news stories.
That reminds me of something I've repeated often. The MSM really needs to publish his Truth Social posts verbatim. Most, not all. Some are just fatuous sh*tposting, but he does use it as a platform for his most grotesque grievances and revenge fantasies, and people who are not attached to social media need to see them. Harry Sisson recently posted on Twitter about Trump going on a rampage of 55 Truth Social posts in 3 hours! This is clearly just lunacy. But the MSM just shrugs and moves on.
What I would like to see is some interviewing of Truth Social followers who aren’t journos or elected politicians. I’d like to know what their reactions are. It might depress me even more than I already am, but at least I would have some insight into what they are thinking about all the obvious craziness.
Regarding the third recommendation I've wondered if there is a verb scale in the headlines: "Trump States...", "Trump Asserts...", "Trump Says...", "Trump Claims..." etc.. Even if "Says" is allowing for irony quotes, irony is a very poor counter to a barrage of authoritarian falsehood.
Using the declarative verb “Trump CLAIMS,” rather than descriptions such as “states without evidence” and other verbs, would help place his statements in a more accurate perspective. The president is constantly falsely claiming this, that, or the other “fact” to the point that more skepticism should be built into the reporting. If the press still can’t call him a liar, prevaricator, or even a lunatic, please at least stop framing Trump’s outpourings as statements of fact.
Jeff Tiedrich's challenge of March 31, 2020, still stands: A lifetime Pulitzer to the first reporter who asks Trump that very question -- spelling out the WTF part.
Excellent column, as usual. And as usual, I have a thought. I’d add a 6th way, threading the needle between (1)avoiding his distractions; and (5) using direct language.
Regularly quote his off-color, half-baked, ridiculous tweets & statements in full so America can see him as a man in full. Most won’t like what they see.
The NYTimes is wholly guilty of sanitizing his tweets and statements, extracting the parts that appear to make sense. Why do they do this? I can't say for sure. Maybe to project "fairness" — as if they were quoting a sane man.
I watch late night comedy in part because Trump’s wackiest posts are frequently featured as subject matter these days. No way I’m logging into Truth Social to read this nonsense directly.
Trouble is, too many of us are easily distracted from important news by stories about train wrecks, car crashes, celebrity scandals, and murders most foul. A catalogue of Trump inanities would serve the same purpose. It's also worth noting that polls consistently indicate that approximately one-third of "America" still approves of this guy.
The big question is why is this advice necessary? I learned all this in J school back in the day. It was foundational to the practice of journalism. When you treat journalism as entertainment, or as a propaganda tool or media channels as just another asset in your portfolio, this is what you get.
I so appreciate your analysis and could not agree more. I was raised in the Deep South and manners are second nature to me. Manners and decorum and deference have their place but when someone is called “piggy” or “bitch”, that cannot be ignored. I don’t pretend to know the answer but just standing there may not be it. Please keep up the fight! (Paid subscriber)
“ I was happy to read in Brian Stelter’s newsletter that this year’s disrupted dinner may be rescheduled as a luncheon or a more “modest” dinner.”
Um, this sounds like making a virtue of necessity, at best. One of the former leaders of the White House correspondents association said that these things are incredibly difficult to schedule in a normal context and rescheduling it would be a nightmare. And, considering that The Lord High Snowflake was planning a speech that was a smorgasbord of grievance excoriating the press for hurting his tender feelings, it seems to me the wiser alternative would be to declare the 2025 dinner to be the last.
More to the main topic of your post, the excoriation will be breathlessly reported regardless of the modesty or grandeur of the event, even though - as you correctly noted - the duty to report every word the president says should also be declared dead.
If they had tried to reschedule the event at the same scale it would be so far in the future that it would almost immediately be followed by the 2027 event.
Skipping an iteration might be considered a benefit. Getting chewed out at a luncheon instead of a dinner? Not so much.
I loved your suggestion to radically re-think the WHCD, not just because of the symbolism, but also for what it really represents, as you pointed out Ms. Sullivan. Less symbiosis with the powerful: eliminate the idea that elite reporters are part of the Washington power class and more of the idea that they stand outside it and are the guardians of democracy. Jamie Raskin’s viral exchange with Dana Bash, reminding her that only one side is trying to eliminate press freedoms shines an example of why elite reporters need to break out of their parasitic relationship with an authoritarian leader.
I also loved Kate Cohen’s dream that lies would be treated like obscenities by reporters.
Good suggestions Margaret, but Trump floods the zone everyday, much of it incoherent and nonsense. And yet, everyday, Trump is the lede story in The NY Times, the WAPO and the WSJ. He thrives on this attention and they all crave the revenue from the ad buys.
What would Trump do if the top 10 leading daily publications did a 10 day moratorium on Trump stories? 99% of them contain Trump's lies and don't call him out for the lies.
And this is why millions of us get our latest information from Substack, the Guardian, YouTube and even TikTok.
How many Pulitzer Prize winning journalists and writers have moved to Substack? Sure, there are still some excellent journalists in the MSM, but I can almost always get the same information presented better from other sources.
I'd add an arguably worse offense in ignoring Trump's insanity as if it didn't happen. I'm referring to U.S. mass media not covering his weekend posts for Mother's Day (!) and the long rant about Iran's counterproposal. Clearly off his rocker, but I saw it only in EU accounts.
Margaret, while I naturally agree with everything you say I fear it’s all moot unless the media goes through a sort of metaphorical twelve step program and starts by admitting that they have a problem. Our interventions are clearly not working. Sadly, I have lost faith that it will happen.
12 steps to having courage, honesty and integrity … I believe there are many, if not most, reporters who would gladly show these characters if they were not throttled by their craven, cowardly management and ownership. With the likes of the Ellisons and the Bozos forcing once reasonably and relatively capable and unbiased news outlets to do their bidding — and that of the Oligarchy — what free press and news outlets there were became simple fodder for promoting Trumphukian lies and turning blind eyes to the violations of law and the corruption that’s so apparent.
The FCC has become a means of furthering the interests of the CABAL. On the one hand allowing networks to kibosh free speech while on the other permitting stations and networks to be bought up and consolidated under owners willing to do their bidding.
It’s time to end the sane washing and the diminution of the illegalities and corruption of the Trumphukian regime. I feel there is a growing population that wants the lies exposed and the perpetrators brought to task. Given the chance outlets that are uncowed by the threats from the maladministration can come to the fore and thrive. But something must be done to protect them and to stop the “Oligops” from attacking and thwarting them.
Excellent article. Much overdue. Please keep hammering this message because the journalistic malpractice you describe here is contributing to the rot of our democracy.
Thanks for the straight talk. Too many journalists sugar coat their reporting on this administration for fear of retaliation and we can see where that's landed us. Kudos to you.
An asside on the Post journalists' suggestions: just do what I.F. Stone did for so many years. He was famous for knowing and getting quotes from Federal worker bees, and eschewing whatever the spokespeople said.
I still want the media to publish Trump's original WHCA dinner speech -- the one he was so excited to give because it was gonna be "nasty." He said the next day that he was changing his speech for the rescheduled event to "tone things done."
So, Mr. Trump, show us that first speech and then deplore what you planned to say. Voters oight to see if their president is really changing his course -- or, in this case, his discourse.
And I think the media should repeatedly point out that Trump's only coming to the event this year because the featured entertainer is a magician. Invite Jimmy Kimmel and see if Trump shows!
This is for the male reporters: The next time trump treats a woman reporter like dirt, ovary up and ask the EXACT. SAME. QUESTION. she just asked. If you can't do that, quit. People who enable misogynists are worse than the misogynists.
Better yet make reporters stand up and shout, “Answer her question!” And repeat until he does it you’re all ejected!
Absolutely agree! Grow a pair of ovaries, gentlemen, and support your colleagues.
I like your formulation. Male reporters need to grow a pair of ovaries and speak up for their colleagues.
Oof. Typical male. I just mansplained and tried to take credit for what Wendy had already noted. Mea culpa.
Ovaries are bad-ass. The male equivalents are pretty damn wimpy, right? I've also noticed that tacotrump is a serious coward and won't insult male reporters the same way - he just ends the question session and runs off.
The men never will do that because they value access more than actual reporting. They’re all dickless assholes.
I’m all for running the things Trump says if it’s in the frame “WTF is wrong with this guy.” Without ellipses, without paraphrasing — let people know that this guy can’t get through a sentence without retreating to his safe topics of lying about 2020, lying about the economy, and racism and sexual harassment.
But anyone who starts a headline or an alert with “Trump says …” and treats it like an actual statement from an actual president — yeah. Reevaluate all your choices in life.
I was thinking a bullet list in the bottom corner of a page (web or print), with the heading like "Trump's Daily Distractions." Yes, I want to know what he's doing to distract us, but I just want to know what they are so I can skip past blown-up news stories.
I like it!
That reminds me of something I've repeated often. The MSM really needs to publish his Truth Social posts verbatim. Most, not all. Some are just fatuous sh*tposting, but he does use it as a platform for his most grotesque grievances and revenge fantasies, and people who are not attached to social media need to see them. Harry Sisson recently posted on Twitter about Trump going on a rampage of 55 Truth Social posts in 3 hours! This is clearly just lunacy. But the MSM just shrugs and moves on.
What I would like to see is some interviewing of Truth Social followers who aren’t journos or elected politicians. I’d like to know what their reactions are. It might depress me even more than I already am, but at least I would have some insight into what they are thinking about all the obvious craziness.
Regarding the third recommendation I've wondered if there is a verb scale in the headlines: "Trump States...", "Trump Asserts...", "Trump Says...", "Trump Claims..." etc.. Even if "Says" is allowing for irony quotes, irony is a very poor counter to a barrage of authoritarian falsehood.
Using the declarative verb “Trump CLAIMS,” rather than descriptions such as “states without evidence” and other verbs, would help place his statements in a more accurate perspective. The president is constantly falsely claiming this, that, or the other “fact” to the point that more skepticism should be built into the reporting. If the press still can’t call him a liar, prevaricator, or even a lunatic, please at least stop framing Trump’s outpourings as statements of fact.
Jeff Tiedrich's challenge of March 31, 2020, still stands: A lifetime Pulitzer to the first reporter who asks Trump that very question -- spelling out the WTF part.
Excellent column, as usual. And as usual, I have a thought. I’d add a 6th way, threading the needle between (1)avoiding his distractions; and (5) using direct language.
Regularly quote his off-color, half-baked, ridiculous tweets & statements in full so America can see him as a man in full. Most won’t like what they see.
The NYTimes is wholly guilty of sanitizing his tweets and statements, extracting the parts that appear to make sense. Why do they do this? I can't say for sure. Maybe to project "fairness" — as if they were quoting a sane man.
Maybe to help sell newspapers
No. It’s to avoid his ire. To avoid a baseless civil suit, that even if unfounded, will cost them in legal fees to defend.
A SLAPP. Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.
I watch late night comedy in part because Trump’s wackiest posts are frequently featured as subject matter these days. No way I’m logging into Truth Social to read this nonsense directly.
Trouble is, too many of us are easily distracted from important news by stories about train wrecks, car crashes, celebrity scandals, and murders most foul. A catalogue of Trump inanities would serve the same purpose. It's also worth noting that polls consistently indicate that approximately one-third of "America" still approves of this guy.
YES!!!!!!!
The big question is why is this advice necessary? I learned all this in J school back in the day. It was foundational to the practice of journalism. When you treat journalism as entertainment, or as a propaganda tool or media channels as just another asset in your portfolio, this is what you get.
I so appreciate your analysis and could not agree more. I was raised in the Deep South and manners are second nature to me. Manners and decorum and deference have their place but when someone is called “piggy” or “bitch”, that cannot be ignored. I don’t pretend to know the answer but just standing there may not be it. Please keep up the fight! (Paid subscriber)
Thanks very much, Beth.
“ I was happy to read in Brian Stelter’s newsletter that this year’s disrupted dinner may be rescheduled as a luncheon or a more “modest” dinner.”
Um, this sounds like making a virtue of necessity, at best. One of the former leaders of the White House correspondents association said that these things are incredibly difficult to schedule in a normal context and rescheduling it would be a nightmare. And, considering that The Lord High Snowflake was planning a speech that was a smorgasbord of grievance excoriating the press for hurting his tender feelings, it seems to me the wiser alternative would be to declare the 2025 dinner to be the last.
I agree but since I don’t see that happening I’m glad to see it downsized.
More to the main topic of your post, the excoriation will be breathlessly reported regardless of the modesty or grandeur of the event, even though - as you correctly noted - the duty to report every word the president says should also be declared dead.
If they had tried to reschedule the event at the same scale it would be so far in the future that it would almost immediately be followed by the 2027 event.
Skipping an iteration might be considered a benefit. Getting chewed out at a luncheon instead of a dinner? Not so much.
I loved your suggestion to radically re-think the WHCD, not just because of the symbolism, but also for what it really represents, as you pointed out Ms. Sullivan. Less symbiosis with the powerful: eliminate the idea that elite reporters are part of the Washington power class and more of the idea that they stand outside it and are the guardians of democracy. Jamie Raskin’s viral exchange with Dana Bash, reminding her that only one side is trying to eliminate press freedoms shines an example of why elite reporters need to break out of their parasitic relationship with an authoritarian leader.
I also loved Kate Cohen’s dream that lies would be treated like obscenities by reporters.
Good suggestions Margaret, but Trump floods the zone everyday, much of it incoherent and nonsense. And yet, everyday, Trump is the lede story in The NY Times, the WAPO and the WSJ. He thrives on this attention and they all crave the revenue from the ad buys.
What would Trump do if the top 10 leading daily publications did a 10 day moratorium on Trump stories? 99% of them contain Trump's lies and don't call him out for the lies.
And this is why millions of us get our latest information from Substack, the Guardian, YouTube and even TikTok.
How many Pulitzer Prize winning journalists and writers have moved to Substack? Sure, there are still some excellent journalists in the MSM, but I can almost always get the same information presented better from other sources.
Agree completely. We've been writing about this same subject for how many years with no change?
YES x 5. Each point is...on point! LOL. I am so sick of wasting time, words on this shit show.
I'd add an arguably worse offense in ignoring Trump's insanity as if it didn't happen. I'm referring to U.S. mass media not covering his weekend posts for Mother's Day (!) and the long rant about Iran's counterproposal. Clearly off his rocker, but I saw it only in EU accounts.
6. Don't be on the take.
Margaret, while I naturally agree with everything you say I fear it’s all moot unless the media goes through a sort of metaphorical twelve step program and starts by admitting that they have a problem. Our interventions are clearly not working. Sadly, I have lost faith that it will happen.
12 steps to having courage, honesty and integrity … I believe there are many, if not most, reporters who would gladly show these characters if they were not throttled by their craven, cowardly management and ownership. With the likes of the Ellisons and the Bozos forcing once reasonably and relatively capable and unbiased news outlets to do their bidding — and that of the Oligarchy — what free press and news outlets there were became simple fodder for promoting Trumphukian lies and turning blind eyes to the violations of law and the corruption that’s so apparent.
The FCC has become a means of furthering the interests of the CABAL. On the one hand allowing networks to kibosh free speech while on the other permitting stations and networks to be bought up and consolidated under owners willing to do their bidding.
It’s time to end the sane washing and the diminution of the illegalities and corruption of the Trumphukian regime. I feel there is a growing population that wants the lies exposed and the perpetrators brought to task. Given the chance outlets that are uncowed by the threats from the maladministration can come to the fore and thrive. But something must be done to protect them and to stop the “Oligops” from attacking and thwarting them.
Excellent article. Much overdue. Please keep hammering this message because the journalistic malpractice you describe here is contributing to the rot of our democracy.
Thanks for the straight talk. Too many journalists sugar coat their reporting on this administration for fear of retaliation and we can see where that's landed us. Kudos to you.
An asside on the Post journalists' suggestions: just do what I.F. Stone did for so many years. He was famous for knowing and getting quotes from Federal worker bees, and eschewing whatever the spokespeople said.
I still want the media to publish Trump's original WHCA dinner speech -- the one he was so excited to give because it was gonna be "nasty." He said the next day that he was changing his speech for the rescheduled event to "tone things done."
So, Mr. Trump, show us that first speech and then deplore what you planned to say. Voters oight to see if their president is really changing his course -- or, in this case, his discourse.
And I think the media should repeatedly point out that Trump's only coming to the event this year because the featured entertainer is a magician. Invite Jimmy Kimmel and see if Trump shows!