How Murdoch Media is fanning the L.A. flames
Plus: Why an ABC reporter should not be fired over his criticism of Stephen Miller
Over the weekend, the New York Post, blasted this front page headline in their usual huge cover type: “L.A. War.”
In an already highly inflamed situation, the Trump-friendly tabloid had no hesitations about escalating things, including with a cover photo of protestors kicking a Border Patrol car.
Other Murdoch-controlled media got with the program, which is calculated to give their favorite politician cover for whatever he decides to do, which may eventually include declaring martial war on woke blue-staters. We’re really not that far from such a thing right now.
Here was a Fox News headline, accompanied by a news alert: ICE arrests ‘worst of the worst’ illegal aliens in Los Angeles as rioters torch city. Note the language: illegal aliens; rioters; torch. And note the point of view from which it’s told.
And here, though more subdued, was the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board: “The clashes turned nasty … President Trump then invoked a little-used law to override what is typically state control and sent in 2,000 troops from the California National Guard. Cue the outrage from Democrats and cries of law-breaking on both sides.” It’s not hard to see where the sympathy lies.
As usual, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, whom I wrote about here last week, was clear: “Important to remember that Trump isn’t trying to heal or keep the peace. He’s looking to inflame and divide. His movement doesn’t believe in democracy or protest — and if they get a chance to end the rule of law, they will take it. None of this is on the level.” He’s also kept focused, as he put it, on the main thing: “the Republican bill to throw 15 million off their health care to fund a new $270,000 tax cut for the rich”
Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a student of autocracy, got the picture, too, as she commented over the weekend on the news that 500 Marines were ready to deploy as backup to the National Guard troops on the ground in L.A.
“Grotesque,” she commented, making reference to the infamous Chilean dictator and junta leader. “Shades of Pinochet.”
But the Murdoch-controlled media doesn’t see it that way. They’re on board, and of course, Trump counts on that cheerleading squad, the very same one that helped him gain both of his terms.
We all have our complaints about mainstream media but Murdoch Media is a whole other creature. Talk to your Fox-watching friends about the deeper message here. (I actually do think that’s a good idea, though it may feel like hitting your head against a wall.)
On to the journalism controversy of last weekend. ABC News national correspondent Terry Moran was suspended after a social-media post that harshly criticized Trump ally Stephen Miller. Moran’s post read in part:
“Miller is a man who is richly endowed with the capacity for hatred. He’s a world-class hater. You can see this just by looking at him because you can see that his hatreds are his spiritual nourishment. He eats his hate.” Moran called Trump a world-class hater, too.
The White House demanded that Moran be disciplined and ABC News (reminder: owned by Disney) was already all over it. Moran had been suspended; as of this writing, it wasn’t clear if he’d be back.
Plenty of observers cheered Moran for simply describing the reality he has observed up close as a reporter. The gist of their approval was, well, aren’t journalists supposed to tell the truth, and isn’t this the undeniable truth?
ABC News saw it differently and issued a statement: “ABC News stands for objectivity and impartiality in its news coverage and does not condone subjective personal attacks on others.” The statement said that Moran’s post had violated the network’s standards.
Miller, J.D. Vance and that whole crowd used the incident as a way to trash the media more generally. Vance called it a “vile smear.” Miller went broader, writing that Moran’s “public meltdown” was simply a pulling off the mask of neutrality, and that “the privileged anchors and reporters gatekeeping our society have been radicals adopting a journalist’s pose.”
My take: I’m amazed that Moran posted what he did. It’s well outside the bounds of what straight-news reporters do. It’s more than just calling a lie a lie, or identifying a statement as racist — all of which I think is necessary. Moran is not a pundit or a columnist or any other kind of opinion journalist. It’s hard to imagine a news reporter — say, David Sanger of the New York Times, or Carol Leonnig of the Washington Post, going that far. They may write an analysis piece that isn’t “just the facts” of hard-news reporting, but that’s about it.
Traditional newsrooms don’t look kindly on reporters being so outspoken. When reporter Wesley Lowery tweeted his opinions while at the Washington Post, then-editor Marty Baron told him he should be a columnist — not a reporter — if that’s what he wanted to do. Lowery left the paper.
I would hate to see Moran — with his worthy career at ABC News, where he’s been for almost 30 years — lose his job over this. I hope that the honchos at ABC let a brief suspension serve its purpose, and put him back to work.
A larger question is whether we are now in such a different era, because of Trump’s march to autocracy (see above), that traditional reporters should have the license — even the encouragement — to say whatever they wish, in whatever way they wish. After all, as Norman Ornstein wrote in The Contrarian on Monday, we’ve entered such a destructive phase in America that it needs a new name; he suggests “nihilocracy.”
I’m sympathetic to Moran and wary of ABC’s tendency toward capitulation; I don’t certainly want to see him go down in flames. But I agree with Tom Jones of Poynter Institute who suggests that — especially given the immediate right-wing politicization of the post — it was ill-advised. “In the end,” Jones wrote, “this tweet did some damage.”
Maybe traditional hard-news reporting — with its restrained language and its limits on reporters expressing opinions — really will become a thing of the past. Maybe it will soon be as quaint as newspapers rolling off the presses and landing on every front porch. But right now, it’s still an important part of the reality-based journalism that underpins democracy.
To clarify: I certainly don’t believe in pulling punches, in “sane-washing” Trump, or in normalizing the abnormal. Those failures can be avoided within the boundaries of traditional, factual reporting. And separately, I do believe in strong commentary and sharp opinion — by the commentators who clearly have that role.
Moran should come back from a brief suspension. Anything more severe than that would amount to the cowering capitulation we’ve already seen far too much of, including from ABC News.
Readers, what say you? Does my logic make sense to you, or do you see it differently?
Thanks very much for being here. Below the subscriber message is a description of who I am and what I’m trying to do here on American Crisis. I’ll probably include it on my posts from now on, as there are many newcomers. Welcome!
My background: I am a Lackawanna, NY native who started my career as a summer intern at the Buffalo News, my hometown daily. After years as a reporter and editor, I was named the paper’s first woman editor in chief in 1999, and ran the 200-person newsroom for almost 13 years. Starting in 2012, I served as the first woman “public editor” of the New York Times — an internal media critic and reader representative — and later was the media columnist for the Washington Post. These days, I write here on Substack, as well as for the Guardian US, and teach a journalism ethics course at Columbia University. I’ve also written two books and won a few awards, including three for defending First Amendment principles.
The purpose of ‘American Crisis’: My aim is to use this newsletter (it started as a podcast in 2023) to push for the kind of journalism we need for our democracy to function — journalism that is accurate, fair, mission-driven and public-spirited. That means that I point out the media’s flaws and failures when necessary.
What I ask of you: I’m grateful to have more than 46,000 subscribers here. Last November, I removed the paywall so that everyone could read and comment. I thought it was important in this crucial moment and might be helpful. If you are able to subscribe at $50 a year or $8 a month, or upgrade your unpaid subscription, that will help to support this venture — and to keep it going — but it’s not required. You’re more than welcome here either way. Thank you!
The only damage Mr. Moran’s post may have done is do to the right’s incredibly efficient spin machine and the left’s lack of solid ground. No sentient observer could deny the hatred that oozes out of both trump and miller.
Funny, no one is attempting to rebut the truth of Moran's post. What he said is so true and perceptive that all of Trump's defenders can do is call him names and say this reveals the bias of the media. No one, especially not Miller, can deny that hate is the element he and his boss swim in. It was indeed impolitic for Moran to speak so plainly; only Trump and his minions are allowed to characterize their opponents as haters, Marxists, communists, etc.