Will the White House press be even more submissive?
When the media seeks “unity” with politicians, we’re all in trouble
Even when the White House Correspondents’ Dinner goes smoothly, it’s a huge embarrassment to journalists. And in the wake of Saturday’s shooting that interrupted the event, the spectacle of journalists cozying up to politicians is likely to get even worse.
“We’ll do it again within the next 30 days,” Donald Trump said, “and we’ll make it bigger and better and even nicer.”
Notice that Trump said “we.” He’s not supposed to be in charge of the event – he was a guest of the press – but he will surely use security concerns to big-foot the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) and dictate the terms of his return appearance, unless someone has the sense to call the whole thing off.
WHCA President Weijia Jiang of CBS News has been deferential to Trump despite his ongoing campaign to feed the 1st Amendment into a wood-chipper. (See my newsletter from two weeks ago with a sample of Trump’s outrageous attacks on the press.)
As Jiang wrote in a first-person piece published yesterday, she welcomed Trump’s appearance this year because she hoped it would “restore some normalcy between the Trump administration and the press. Maybe I was naïve, but I wanted it to be a room we don’t see enough of in Washington: a bipartisan one.”
Jiang said Trump told her after the shooting, “I saw a room that was just totally unified.” She added: “Unity isn’t a word we hear much these days. But that’s how I felt, too.”
Arrrrrrg. The press isn’t supposed to seek unity with politicians. It’s supposed to seek the truth. That’s easier to accomplish – and to get the public to believe – when you’re not clinking champagne glasses with the people you’re reporting on. Jiang and other WHCA members may have good intentions, but if so, they’re such myopic journalists that they don’t understand the authoritarian threat we face. Or maybe they realize it, but refuse to pass up the opportunity to wear expensive clothes, eat tasty food, and boost their social standing – democracy be damned.
In any case, it appears that the co-stars of Washington’s next buddy movie are Trump and Jiang. At his post-shooting news conference, the president had high praise for the WHCA chief, calling her “madam chairman,” and let her ask the first question.
Plans for a dinner do-over are unclear. Jiang wrote: “Trump insists we are having the dinner again in 30 days. Let’s see.” Some Washington journalists think it would be best not to attempt another dinner this year, but Trump tends to fixate on his stupidest ideas. If the dinner does happen, look for the WHCA and the White House to work in lockstep, billing it as a patriotic gesture – an act of “unity.”
Will the event return to the Washington Hilton or will Trump push for another venue? He was quick to note that the Hilton was “not a particularly secure building” and argued that the shooting showed the need for his beloved ballroom, which he has tried to ram through, despite a legal challenge.
Beyond the arrangements for an “even nicer” makeup dinner, there are more reasons to think Saturday’s gunfire will work to Trump’s advantage with the press.
The gunman’s anti-Trump political views are already being used by the right to depict political terrorism as a left-wing problem, when it’s actually more common on the right. If journalists don’t accept the right’s spin, Trump will accuse them of covering up leftist violence.
Also, I fear the shooting will create a stronger emotional bond between Washington journalists and the people in power. It’s human nature for people who go through a harrowing event together to become closer. Politicians and the press – two groups that have a naturally adversarial role in our society – shared a jarring experience in which they faced a common danger. I’m not saying the shooting is likely to make Trump more empathetic – he’s still Trump, after all – but it might lead to a less aggressive posture by the journalists of the WHCA.
And it’s not as if White House reporters were tough on Trump before the shooting. They frequently treat his comments with wide-eyed gullibility, even though he’s the most prominent public liar of our time. They regularly normalize and sanewash his unhinged behavior.
Journalists have generally avoided pushback as Trump has called them “Piggy,” “ugly,” “nasty,” “stupid,” “slime,” “scum,” “very unpatriotic,” “obnoxious,” “disgusting,” “dishonest,” “disgrace,” “loser,” “sleazebag,” “animals,” “some of the worst human beings you’ll ever meet,” “enemy of the people,” and his all-time favorite, “fake news.”
Lesley Stahl of CBS’s “60 Minutes” once recalled a private conversation in which she asked Trump why he insulted the press.
“You know why I do it?” he said. “I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so that when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you.”
If journalists accept that version of “unity,” we’re doomed.
This week’s media atrocity
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has played a key role in helping Trump trash America’s global standing, yet Politico cited his “savvy handling of foreign conflicts” in a story last week as if it were an established fact.
Advertise in this newsletter
Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.
COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project
For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.
That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.
Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.
By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.
The comment made by CA President Weijia Jiang of CBS News wasn't 'naive' at all. It was either completely ignorant of the importance of the independence of the press, or she's bought and paid for. I suspect it's the latter.
The aftermath of the shooting made two things clear. Mark, you were right on that the event should be permanently cancelled because it presents the press and a tyrant as being part of the same club. Also, Trump's media capture could not have been more blatant. Weijia Jiang on her post-shooting network interview clearly was full of herself, basking in the limelight and feeling so self important about exchanging phone calls with Trump. I have read that she even lauded Lyin' Leavitt for all the (despicable) work she does. Then Dana Bash asks Jamie Raskin if he feel guilty for saying terrible things about Trump? This is reminiscent of the Charlie Kirk assassination, when people lost their jobs for making fact-based criticisms of the late Turning Point leader. Even Brian Stelter joined the club, gushing over Trump for saying they were all in it together. People, if you want to stop this crap, volunteer for a mid-term campaign on any level because as our few Democratic leaders said when I lived in deep-red Missouri, "DC isn't coming to save us."