Pettiness and superficiality characterize both the political and journalism spheres, but the ongoing drama between the Trump administration and the Associated Press is setting a new, low standard for triviality.
The AP was tossed from accessing White House events because of its refusal to refer to the body of water west of Florida, east of Texas and south of Louisiana as the Trump-preferred “Gulf of America.” No doubt there is more to the White House grudge against AP than what to call a body of water, but that is the working explanation for now.
The AP seemingly had won a round in this pillow fight when federal judge Trevor McFadden ordered the White House to restore AP access to the Oval Office and other limited spaces when other press outlets are also allowed. But the White House press managers bounced off the mat this week to again restrict AP access to the Oval Office meeting between President Trump and the president of El Salvador. The AP claims, probably correctly, that this latest barrier violates the judge’s order.
The White House turned up the pressure again this week, removing the guaranteed spot for wire services in the rotating press pool. The AP has run to court again, claiming the move targets the AP.
This dustup will have many more chapters before it runs its course. Whatever the eventual outcome, both the AP and the White House will come off looking like losers.
News consuming citizens might be somewhat amused by the posturing, but they know well there are much more important things for the AP and the White House to be doing than squabbling over terminology of ocean water, or even who gets to hold a reporter’s notebook in a press gaggle. This is an unnecessary skirmish to excite Trump haters and Trump devotees. Most sane people agree there are already enough such skirmishes.
Some lawyers will make money over this dispute, and partisan pundits will drone on about the supposed broader implications for democracy, press freedom and so on. But this kind of barking distracts the public from more important issues, and there is no need to clutter up our federal courts.
The White House’s mismanagement of this issue began when it first rationalized its targeting of the AP for failing to rename the Gulf of whatever it is. That came off as the government punishing a press outlet over its content. Any federal judge who understands the First Amendment will side with the press on such matters. It is the American way that a news organization can use whatever terminology it pleases and get First Amendment protection. The AP could call the moon the Big Beach Ball and it shouldn’t matter to the White House.
The White House has wide latitude to manage press access to the administration, however, which Judge McFadden clearly pointed out in his order. But limiting access for a single outlet over content decisions is problematic.
The AP, for its part, should consider how presumptuous it looks by acting entitled. The First Amendment allows for a free press, but it doesn’t guarantee any particular outlet more access than any other. Sure, the AP is the largest news organization in the United States and one of the largest in the world. But it doesn’t deserve exceptional treatment just because of its reach.
The AP is also decidedly left-leaning, as rated by the respected AllSides Media Bias Chart. Perhaps some of AP’s preferential White House treatment from past years should go to more centrist news outlets.
One must also question how much harm the AP has really suffered from the White House restrictions. AP reporters continue to file reports about the Trump administration. Like other outlets, the AP has access to all filings coming out of the press pool system in the White House.
What’s more, while the AP has made a federal fuss over the naming of a certain gulf, it had no problem changing the name of Mount Denali back to Mount McKinley when Trump announced that name change. Names of things change all the time, including sports teams, military bases and even people, and the AP just adapts. The AP should focus more on reporting news than trying to make it.
It is well known that Trump likes to battle and belittle the press corps, and there are times when the press needs to stand and fight. This is not one of those times. The guardrails of democracy are not at stake in this tussle. There are plenty of other media outlets, including anti-Trump outlets, to provide thorough coverage of the White House. Thus, this Trump-AP fight has minimal broader implication in the press-political world.
This is just another brick in the wall of a growing irrelevance of press-political dialogue that is exhausting sensible Americans.
Jeffrey M. McCall is a media critic and professor of communication at DePauw University. He has worked as a radio news director, a newspaper reporter and as a political media consultant.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( There are no winners in the AP-White House feud )
Also on site :
- French leftists cry foul as Israel nixes visit
- Meeting with the Exporters and Investors Club
- Cardinals announce death of Pope Francis