The Two Dangerously Disparate Faces of American News Media

Vladimir Putin has won re-election in a landslide.

Shocking, huh? Who’d have thought a guy who routinely has his opposition imprisoned and/or killed (a lot of people in Russia seem to “fall out of windows”) would so handily win a fifth term as president?

No one who knows anything about how craven and bloodthirsty Putin is expected anything different. This election was decided before the polls even opened, and everyone knew this. Even the media has been calling this out for what it is: a sham.

Even American news media, which is horrifically corporatized and polarized, has been mostly unified in clearly stating that this election was pure theatrics. I’ve actually been rather surprised by just how pointed some of the news coverage has been; many outlets have moved beyond simply quoting the opposition and are now clearly stating that Putin staged his re-election.

A prime example is a report I saw the other morning on CBS News. The anchors were quite clear that this election was pre-decided, but their correspondent, Elizabeth Palmer, was pointed and direct, something I rarely see from any journalist. She’s a renowned journalist, with decades of experience covering both Russia and the Middle East, and she knows the politics and political machinations of these regions far better than most people do. Palmer opened her report by calling the election “stage managed so that Vladimir Putin was the only real candidate on the ballot” and called the other three candidates on the ballot “pre-approved Kremlin cutouts”. 

I was STUNNED to hear such rhetoric from a reporter, but pleased, as it is the job of a journalist to report the facts, and in this case, the facts are that this election was completely illegitimate. And CBS is hardly an outlier; per Ground News, a news aggregator that examines news coverage by political bias, coverage of the election has transcended political divisions, something rarely seen in this age of increasingly polarized media, to concur that this election was clearly illegitimate. From what I can see, the only outlets toeing a more “neutral” line are far-right outlets that are generally very sympathetic to Putin, along with those that either publish Russian propaganda (for example, InfoWars’ story on this was actually written by RT, which is Russian state propaganda) or quite literally ARE Russian propaganda (think RT, Sputnik, etc.), and they are VERY much in the minority. 

I love that media outlets across the world and across the political spectrum are in agreement on this farce of an election, and that they’re calling it out. It’s particularly refreshing to see American media agree on this, given how bitterly polarized and flagrantly biased so much of our media is these days. But this begs a huge question: if our news media can overcome their divisions to speak such clear, objective truth about Putin, why can’t they do the same about our own leaders?

For nearly a decade, American news media has been walking on eggshells around Donald Trump, afraid of calling him what he is, despite a constantly growing mountain of completely irrefutable evidence. They’re so worried about maintaining “neutrality” and “journalistic credibility” that they’re unwilling to simply state that he is a sexual predator and a con artist. Why?

This is a man who has been proven IN COURT to have raped a woman, yet the media refers to him as having “allegedly” sexually assaulted her.

This is a man who is proven by his OWN WORDS, captured on TAPE, to have sexually assaulted countless women, yet the media refuses to call him a sexual predator.

This is a man who has been proven IN COURT to have committed decades of fraud against New York taxpayers, yet the media refers to his PROVEN crimes as “allegations”.

This is a man who has been proven in MULTIPLE courts AND a Congressional committee to have fomented, incited, and participated in an insurrection, yet the media refers to these crimes as “allegations”. They also refuse to clearly state that he is constitutionally disqualified from holding any office ever again, despite the clear language of Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment.

This is a man who has a documented, PROVEN history of horrifically racist and misogynistic statements and actions, yet the media refuses to flat-out call him a racist or misogynist.

This is a man pathologically incapable of telling the truth, who lied well over 30,000 times in his first term as president (and his pace increased by the day; at the beginning of his term, it was just a few per day, and at the end of his term, it was something like 50 a day), yet the media refuses to call him a liar. Moreover, in live interviews, they often refuse to fact-check him, instead letting him spout an endless stream of demonstrable lies (such as his horrific town hall on CNN, where he defamed E. Jean Carroll, just hours after a jury found that he assaulted and defamed her, repeatedly while host Kaitlan Collins simply let him rant, or his lie-filled interview with Kristen Welker on “Meet the Press”.

This is a man whose mental state, precarious during his first term, is now clearly failing, yet the media refuses to state the truth that nearly every mental health expert in the country is saying, which is that he is DANGEROUSLY unstable and not fit to hold office.

This is a man who is ON RECORD stating his plans to destroy our democracy and replace it with a Christofascist state led by him, yet the media refuses to call him a fascist or a tyrant.

This is a man who now routinely calls for political violence, yet the media refuses to call him out for this, instead reporting labelling these calls as “controversial”.

And this behavior isn’t even limited to just protecting Trump; the media treats the Republican Party in much the same way. For example, when they pass bans on gender-affirming care, drag shows, diversity initiatives, and abortion, the media refers to them as “controversial” instead of calling them what they are, which is bigoted and dangerous. Even when they pass clearly unconstitutional laws, such as Texas’ immigration bill, the media won’t call them out; instead, they label these laws as “controversial” as well.

Why does the media behave this way? Why do they allow this revolting excuse for a human being, along with his cultish political "party", to continually run roughshod over them?

Why do they continue letting him sow the lies and violence and disinformation that have already done so much damage to our country?

Why can they call out Putin for rigging the election in Russia, yet not do the same for Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election?

Why are they so scared of speaking the simple, objective, proven truth that Donald Trump is a liar, a racist, a misogynist, a sexual predator, an insurrectionist, a traitor, and a fascist?

Many people have been asking these questions for nearly a decade, since Trump first came down the escalator to announce his candidacy. In fact, entire books and documentaries have been made on this subject, by people far more intelligent and knowledgeable on this subject than I. The general consensus is that it largely comes down to greed: the news wants viewers, whether that be people reading the newspaper or watching the news on TV or the internet, and Trump brings that coverage. In fairness, we know that American news media has a long, despicably sordid history of running dubious stories purely to get eyes on screens or newspapers in peoples’ hands, so this behavior is hardly new. But with Trump, it's gone beyond the pale. CNN International’s former chief, Tony Maddox, confirmed this in 2017 when he called Trump “good for business”. Leslie Moonves, the former CEO of CBS, issued a similar sentiment the year before, saying that Trump “may not be good for America, but [he]’s damn goodfor CBS.” 

But something’s different now, and it goes beyond greed (though I agree that it’s a HUGE part of the equation). I believe it’s a combination of fear and being completely unprepared and incapable of handling someone as deranged and deluded as Trump.

Fear is the more obvious of the two, and it stems from two places. First, the media fears the consequences of speaking too pointedly about Trump. He’s a notoriously litigious man, who has no qualms about filing even the most brazenly meritless lawsuits (one of his suits trying to overturn the 2020 election results was so ludicrous and frivolous that, in addition to throwing out the suit, the judge slapped sanctions on his lawyers for wasting the court’s time and resources on something clearly designed for the sole purpose of sowing distrust in our democratic processes). They fear he’ll try to sue them for defamation (he’s already tried to sue CNN, but the suit was thrown out for lack of merit), and they also fear he’ll sic his MAGA followers on them. This fear is understandable, using it as justification to avoid reporting the truth is still cowardly.

Second, they fear doing anything that would impugn their credibility as journalists. As a general ethics rule, journalists should remain as neutral as is possible, as their job is to report the facts, not editorialize. Most of the media hides behind neutrality like a shield, trying desperately to treat him like any other politician, despite the glaring differences. But by doing so, they’re actually failing in their responsibilities as journalists, as journalism is much more than reporting the facts. The job of a journalist is to provide the facts, yes, but to also provide proper context so that we can accurately understand those facts and what they mean. Yes, the line between providing context and editorializing is quite thin and easy to cross, but if you’re refusing to provide *any* context for fear of crossing that line, then you’re not doing your job as a journalist. Instead, you’re forcing people to rely on the opinions of others instead of the facts, which inevitably leads to an uninformed electorate fueled by conspiracy theories and disinformation. And when you refuse to speak the irrefutable truth about a man like Trump, and the horrific damage he’s wrought on this country, you’re tacitly endorsing him, as silence is complicity.

The ultimate irony in this is that by refusing to act for fear of damaging their credibility, the media has done infinitely MORE damage to their credibility than speaking out against Trump could ever had done. Liberals and Progressives (myself included), who have vociferously defended the media against Trump’s constant barrage of heinous attacks, are repulsed and angered by their constant protection of Trump, by their refusal/inability to call him the fraud, predator, traitor, and criminal he is. We will continue defending the media, as it’s critically important to have a free news media in a democracy, but we have little trust left in them, and their continued complicity in Trump’s bigotry and treason will only further erode what little trust remains.

The other problem the media is grappling with is that they simply don’t know how to handle Trump. While our country’s history is rife with repulsive, dangerous, craven, malicious people, we’ve never before seen someone who embodies these traits so thoroughly gain so much power and so much popular support (the closest parallel would probably be Father Coughlin, the pro-Nazi priest who had a radio show in the 1930s listened to by tens of millions each week, but he never ran for office). Because of this, the news media was completely unprepared and had no idea how to handle him when he burst on the scene in 2015. In fairness, however, NONE of us imagined he’d be around long; we all predicted he’d probably drop out early in the primaries. But while most of us have learned how to deal with him in the last nine years, the media clearly has not. They’re continuing to just do “business as usual”, despite the fact that Trump is growing more violent, malicious, craven, and fascist (and deluded and detached from reality) by the hour.

Why the media hasn’t learned, after NINE YEARS, how to treat this despot, is beyond my comprehension. It may be due to the above-mentioned fears, and it may be due to their greed and lust for ratings. It may be both or neither of these. But ultimately, it doesn’t matter what the reason is; what matters is that they’re contributing to the demise of our democracy through their refusal to do their job as journalists.

This is untenable. Our republic cannot survive without a strong, free press, but the press these days continually fails us by kowtowing to Trump and his MAGA cronies. It’s incomprehensible to hear the media universally bash Putin for his anti-democratic “election”, yet get crickets from them on Trump’s attempts to overthrow the election results in 2016, 2020, and even the plans he’s laying out to try again this year.

They call out Putin’s intimidation of opposition candidates through violence, imprisonment, and murder, but when Trump threatens violence should he lose or be convicted, they won’t call him out.

They call out Putin’s extortion schemes that silence dissent, yet give Trump a pass when he threatens any public official who dares defy him.

It defies all logic that they can be so justifiably harsh with Putin, speaking the clear facts of his tyranny, yet they refuse to do the same for Trump, citing a need to be “neutral” and to avoid “editorializing”.

Enough is enough. The media needs to grow up. They need to stop treating Trump like any other politician, and they need to stop playing his games. He’s a twisted, evil, malicious, racist, misogynistic, fascistic sexual predator, and it’s time the media starts calling him out. It’s not a violation of journalistic ethics to call Putin the tyrant he is, and it’s LONG past time for the media to start treating Trump and his cronies the same way. Continuing to refuse to call Trump a clear and present danger to our democracy, when he so CLEARLY is, is journalistic malpractice at best, and at worst, it’s flat-out malfeasance.