Journalism

A poll from The Economist/YouGov asked Americans whether they would support “permitting the courts to shut down news media outlets for publishing or broadcasting stories that are biased or inaccurate.” The results were scary for anyone concerned about the future of American democracy.

According to the poll, Americans are roughly evenly divided on whether the US government should have the power to shut down unfriendly media outlets: 28 percent favor, 29 percent oppose, and 43 percent are unsure. But the results become really striking when you break them down by partisan identification: A fairly large plurality of Republicans — 45 percent — support allowing media organizations to be shuttered. A scant 20 percent oppose the idea; that’s less than half the number who support it. The remaining 35 percent of Republicans have not made up their minds.

The good news: Cameras were allowed to record July 26’s White House briefing. The bad news: They didn’t have a whole lot to record.

The crew of White House correspondents had a number of questions about the new White House policy on the service of transgender Americans in the military — a policy that President Donald Trump announced on twitter. Of course, any policy change announced via three tweets invites questions, owing to the fact that 420 characters leave only so much room for details. But the back and forth at the briefing did not go well. The questions were about a proactive White House policy announced directly by the President of the United States. Accordingly, the White House press secretary should be brimming with facts and perspectives and talking points. Or at least an answer as to what happens to current transgender service members. That she sounded like a besieged PR type speaks to a matter of continuity in the Trump White House: Though a new communications director — Anthony Scaramucci — took over recently, Trump’s spokespeople appear to be no better briefed on the issues of the day than they’ve been over the past six months.

The dearth of information coming from the podium will prompt cries — again — that the briefings are useless. Not true. They show that White House officials are as clueless about the outside world as they are about what’s going on inside the building.

The latest fundraising letter from the Trump Make America Great Again Committee (the RNC and Trump for President) is under the salutation of Eric Trump, son of the journalist-bashing president, who joins in the bashing. "What we’re witnessing is a concerted effort by the Fake News Media and bureaucrats to delegitimize a duly elected president and the millions of Americans who proudly cast their votes for my father," the email read, with the kicker: "But we're not letting the witch hunters win." He accused Democrats of "screaming RUSSIA" rather than facing up to their election loss at his father's hands. He asks for a dollar donation to show the witch-hunting media that his father's movement is unstoppable.

Protesters chanted in the Senate visitor galleries July 25 as legislators prepared to vote to open debate on a bill repealing parts of the Affordable Care Act, prompting the Capitol Police to arrest the protesters—and, reportedly, to tell some journalists to delete photos or videos they had taken of the arrests. The protesters began yelling “kill the bill, don’t kill us” from the galleries after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made his opening remarks. Asked to restore order, the Capitol Police removed the protesters and arrested some in the Senate hallways, where journalists trying to document the scene clashed with police and other officials.

Daily Beast reporter Andrew Desiderio tweeted that “Capitol Police made me delete the video I recorded.” HuffPost reporter Jennifer Bendery tweeted that journalists were kept away from hallways where arrests were occurring—and that an officer pushed her when she tried to “get a look” at the protesters.

President Donald Trump went on a Twitter rampage July 24 and 25, spewing a number of false and misleading claims — many of which we have fact-checked previously. The President tweeted, "So many stories about me in the @washingtonpost are Fake News. They are as bad as ratings challenged @CNN. Lobbyist for Amazon and taxes?" as well as, "Is Fake News Washington Post being used as a lobbyist weapon against Congress to keep Politicians from looking into Amazon no-tax monopoly?"

We will begin with a pair of tweets attacking The Washington Post, which is owned by Jeffrey P. Bezos, the founder of Amazon. Amazon does not own The Post, but in any case the president’s claims about “no-tax” Amazon are out of date. Amazon used to lobby to keep Internet sales free from state taxes, but no more. As of March, Amazon is collecting sales tax on purchases in every state that has one.

On July 24, Reps Steve Cohen (D-TN), Mark Sanford (R-SC), and House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) will host a bipartisan forum on freedom of the press entitled, “The State of Press Freedom in 21st Century America.” The forum will explore, among other topics, the following:

• President Donald Trump’s repeated attempts to seemingly de-legitimize mainstream news outlets by calling them “fake news” and “the enemy of the American people;”
• Threats by President Trump to change libel laws to make it easier to pursue lawsuits against the press;
• Aggressive efforts by the Administrations of Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush to prosecute or pressure journalists;
• The potential epidemic of misinformation being presented to the public as “news” that may threaten to undermine the credibility of legitimate journalism;
• Restrictions on access to press briefings; and
• Physical threats to journalists.

Over the first six months of this young presidency, President Donald Trump’s approach to the office has been characterized by self-interest, defiance of basic democratic norms, and often incoherent or self-contradictory communications and priorities. In the face of historic lows in public trust in government and an increasingly polarized electorate, we’ve seen a regression to secrecy in both Congress and the White House. The change has not gone unnoticed around the globe, as our nation’s standing to defend democracy and our government’s ability to advocate for anti-corruption efforts has been precipitously eroded.

In this report, we offer a comprehensive but not exhaustive accounting of the Trump administration’s record on open government to date. More than seven months after we first considered what Trump would mean for open government, the questions we sent to the White House were never formally answered. The actions of this administration, however, speak for themselves. Whatever transparency the President of the United States is demonstrating by speaking directly to the public on Twitter is outweighed by his refusal to disclose and divest, undermined by the opacity of their authorship, and weighted down by false claims and misleading assertions. This president publicly accused his predecessor of wiretapping his campaign with no evidence. If that’s transparency, the word itself has been devalued. Our conclusion on the Trump administration’s record on open government at six months is inescapable: this is a secretive administration, allergic to transparency, ethically compromised, and hostile to the essential role that journalism plays in a democracy.

The New York Times has asked that the television show “Fox & Friends” apologize for what a Times spokeswoman described as a “malicious and inaccurate segment” that aired the week of July 17 accusing the paper of publishing a story in 2015 that had hindered the United States military’s attempt to kill Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS.

In response, Fox News late on July 223 published an update to a story on its website and acknowledged the change in a brief “Fox & Friends” segment the morning of July 24. Both the updated article and the TV segment added part of a comment from The Times stating that the paper had described the piece to the Pentagon before publication and “they had no objections.” Neither the article nor the segment acknowledged the paper’s request for an apology nor did they respond directly to the accusations of inaccuracy.

[Commentary] When I was White House communications director for President Barack Obama I would warn the White House press corps that they were living on borrowed time. In a digital age, with the proliferation of communication platforms, the media was eventually going to need a better answer for why 50 or so reporters deserved daily access to the White House — access not available to other outlets and the general public. Now, the clock has run out. The ultimate disrupter, in the form of President Donald Trump, is seeking to change nearly every rule that presidents and the reporters who cover them have lived by. To lose this give and take — either by refusing to turn on the cameras or by putting a showman at the podium — would be a significant blow to an accountable democracy.

[Jennifer Palmieri served as White House communications director from 2013 to 2015 and was communications director for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign]

Following the 2016 election, which had one of the largest gender gaps in history, women are more likely than men to say they are paying increased attention to politics. And while far more Democrats than Republicans say they have attended a political event, rally or protest since the election, Democratic women – especially younger women and those with postgraduate degrees – are among the most likely to have participated in such a political gathering.

The latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted June 27 to July 9 among 2,505 adults, finds that 52% of Americans say they are paying more attention to politics since Donald Trump’s election; 33% say they are paying about the same amount of attention, while 13% say they are paying less attention to politics. The new survey also finds that, nearly nine months after the election, most people (59%) say it is “stressful and frustrating” to talk about politics with people who have a different opinion of Trump than they do; just 35% find such conversations “interesting and informative."