Last month, tragedy struck the Capital Gazette in Annapolis, Maryland. As most have certainly heard by now, the suspect, Jarrod Ramos, allegedly walked into the newspaper’s office with a shotgun, shooting and killing five employees. As reported by The Washington Post, Ramos had previously attempted to sue the publication after the newspaper ran a story detailing how he had tormented a previous classmate through various correspondences.
Violence is certainly a risk that journalists and media writers must often face, but it’s not the only kind of threat they’re familiar with. More reporters today instead have to face attempts by public figures to discredit journalists and President Trump’s outright threat last October to remove journalists’ licenses and credentials.
Political figures are among the worst culprits of creating an atmosphere of selectively choosing the facts that fit their motives. Recent rhetoric from public individuals, especially the current presidential administration, has made journalists’ already difficult job even more precarious, while simultaneously giving other outlets, such as the President’s beloved Fox News, an influential relationship with the administration.
FactCheck.org outlined various instances in 2017 of Trump wildly claiming “fake news” despite the information being true. For example, Trump attacked NBC News for stating that he had no role in corporations like Ford and GM creating new American jobs, despite company officials confirming that plans were already in the works before the election.
Later that year, Trump attacked the Washington Post for reporting that the president’s planned phone call with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull of Australia ended “abruptly,” claiming that their conversation was “very civil.” A transcript received later demonstrated that the call was “tense”, and, as the Post reported, was cut short by Trump after only 25 minutes, as opposed to the originally scheduled hour.
Yet, despite being proven wrong repeatedly, Trump refuses to stop challenging the truth. As reported by The Hill, President Trump, at a rally last Thursday, told listeners that journalists “are so damn dishonest” and that “75 percent of those people are downright dishonest.” While this might help President Trump out of a tight spot, it does more harm overall to the nation.
Former American Bar Association President Linda Klein argued that the free press should never be restricted or attacked, because it could have massive repercussions on democracy. She stated, “Freedom of the press is important not just to protect reporters and the news media, but to protect our rights to have access to the information we need to make decisions about our government.”
This may especially impact the way students might interpret the education and experience they receive as well. Universities are meant to be places where people from all walks of life come together to learn and evolve by facing difficult facts that might change their worldviews.
President Trump’s behavior of choosing which news best suits his image, and dismissing the rest as “fake,” goes completely against this goal. It promotes confirmation bias, which in turn could negatively impact the way students interpret the information they learn during their time at college, whether they agree with the president on the credibility of news sources or try to oppose his influence by simply blocking out sources he praises.
President Trump’s treatment of Megyn Kelly, timelined by ABC News, is a perfect example of this behavior. After Kelly questioned then-candidate Trump about his use of vulgar comments towards women like “fat pig” and “dog,” Trump not only failed to accept the criticism and apologize for his actions, but he proceeded to make light of those incidents and attack Kelly on television and social media. This kind of toxic behavior tells those that aspire to succeed like Trump that, during debate, the most important target is your opponent’s character, not their argument.
To be fair, it’s not as if this is the first time there’s been clashes between presidents and the press. Clinton and Nixon both fought back against the media during their respective administrations. However, this new volatility and polarization that is now common in our country can certainly be attributed, at least partially, to this aggressive attitude.
And now we’re seeing the result: the creation of ideological bubbles, not only around government figures of all political affiliations, but also around close friends and family members. Forbes reported that both liberals and conservatives have recently started relying more exclusively on particular news sources, such as The New York Times or Fox News, respectively.
In addition to providing news and information, the media also pressure those in the public eye to practice truth and fairness, knowing that they’re bound to be called out for it otherwise. When the press is pushed to the side, the voices and desires of the people are greatly muffled.
Lawyer and press supporter Trevor Timm told TED that “We’re in a situation now where one party controls three branches of the government, so the fourth estate, the press, is really the last mechanism that the public has to force accountability on government.”
This means that when the majority of popular media outlets isn’t taken seriously by those in power, it makes it much harder for everyday Americans to understand the world around them, and to have an impact on it.
On this topic, it doesn’t matter which way you lean politically. Whatever your current views are on the press and the current state of the media, we all need to understand that press builds connections between the different levels of society and puts truth at the forefront in its mission for information. Whenever the press is endangered, or the facts are skewed or attacked, they aren’t the only ones that suffer.
