PBS, Stelter, NYT Agree About Trump’s Kremlin-Style ‘Chilling Effect’ on AP #Political
Tuesday’s PBS News Hour featured guest Brian Stelter, editor of CNN’s Reliable Sources newsletter (and reliable white knight for the mainstream media) to discuss the “chilling effect” of the Trump Administration blocking the Associated Press from the White House pool of reporters.
PBS's guest, the ubiquitous media critic (er, defender) Stelter sounded a familiar cry:
Bennett at least brought up the main issue of contention -- it's not just "Gulf of America" vs "Gulf of Mexico" lingo, but AP's pattern of propaganda in labeling.
The Associated Press itself went into some detail on why the White House is perturbed.
After warning of "a chilling moment when it comes to First Amendment freedoms," and a few sentences later, "there's concerns about a chilling effect here," Stelter borrowed a hysterical Soviet-era metaphor from New York Times White House reporter Peter Baker.
Ironically, Stelter this morning plugged an upcoming book coauthored by CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios reporter Alex Thompson, Original Sin -- President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again. Stelter quoted a selection:
Left out of the Tapper-Thompson condemnation: Members of the press, who were instrumental in helping cover up Biden’s decline, including Tapper himself.
PBS News Hour
2/25/25
7:08:25 p.m. (ET)
Geoff Bennett: And some other news came out of the White House press briefing today about the media itself. The White House says it's changing the traditional process of how reporters cover the president.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced today that the Trump administration will now choose which media outlets will be part of a select pool of reporters that cover smaller events and travel with the president and White House officials
Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary: A select group of D.C. based journalists should no longer have a monopoly over the privilege of press access at the White House. All journalists, outlets and voices deserve a seat at this highly coveted table.
Geoff Bennett: Previously, the pool was organized by the White House Correspondents' Association. That's an independent organization of vetted journalists who cover the president.
The move is part of a broader effort to limit traditional press access. That's after the White House blocked access for Associated Press reporters.
Brian Stelter, chief media analyst for CNN, joins us now. Brian, it's great to have you here.
So the White House is breaking with a century of tradition in which a pool of independently chosen news organizations covers the president's movements and events when full press access isn't possible either due to space or security constraints. The White House says it's trying to make the pool more inclusive.
The White House Correspondents' Association says in a statement that: "This tears at the independence of a free press. In a free country, leaders must not be able to choose their own press corps."
How do you interpret this decision by the White House?
Brian Stelter, CNN Chief Media Correspondent: Geoff, if you and I went out and launched a new news organization today we would be able to apply to be at the White House. We would be able to apply eventually to be in the press pool. So there already is a sense of inclusiveness.
It is possible for new brands, new outlets, new start-ups to join the press corps and even join the press pool. The reality is that the daily grind of covering the White House is expensive and demanding, and it's been done by a handful of big news outlets like the Associated Press for decades and decades.
So the White House here is trying to break that and trying to say it decides who can cover the president, it decides who can ask questions of the president. As you mentioned, the White House Correspondents' Association response, saying this tears at the independence of a free press in the United States, that is true.
And, ultimately, when press access suffers, when press freedom suffers, the public suffers, maybe not right away, but down the line, we start to know less about the president, we start to know less about the administration, and ultimately everyone suffers.
Geoff Bennett: Let's talk a bit more about this specific predicament involving the Associated Press.
Brian Stelter: Yes.
Geoff Bennett: Because the White House is blocking AP access from covering major presidential events over that organization's refusal to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.
And, Brian, it apparently is not just about the map, because the White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, is taking issue with the AP Style Book. She says it's biased. She says it's weaponized to push a divisive and partisan agenda. And we should explain this is widely used as a style guide. It's a writing and editing guide for journalists and writers. How do you see what's happening here?
Brian Stelter: Right.
The AP is having to go to court to try to get this ban reversed. They lost an initial court hearing yesterday. There's another one in March. Maybe over the long term, the AP will prevail. But this is a chilling moment when it comes to First Amendment freedoms, because the AP has been a foundational part of the press pool and now it's been blocked by the president.
This is over word choice. It's over language. The AP says it has to be able to choose what words to use. It can't let the president of the United States decree what words the AP is going to use. And that's true for other news outlets as well. That's why there's concerns about a chilling effect here.
I noticed earlier today Peter Baker of The New York Times, a veteran correspondent who used to work in Moscow, he said these changes remind him of how the Kremlin took over the press pool and banned certain outlets. He said it made sure that only compliant journalists were given access to the Russian government.
So he sees parallels here to what's happened in more repressive countries in the past.
Geoff Bennett: And there's what's happening at the Pentagon, where longtime defense reporters from traditional media outlets first were kicked out of their offices.
Brian Stelter: Right.
Geoff Bennett: And then they were told that they couldn't use communal spaces, they couldn't use the press briefing room to do their reporting or to broadcast their reports
How do you see the administration strategy playing out at the Department of Defense?
Brian Stelter: Right, and CNN one of the outlets affected, NBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post as well.
This is not stopping news outlets from doing the work, from showing up, from asking the questions. However, it is impeding the work. For example, at the Pentagon, there has not been a press briefing since the Trump administration took over. Today, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth went to Guantanamo Bay and did not bring the press, but he did bring his friend from FOX News his former colleague Laura Ingraham.
So what we see here is a strategy. The Trump White House and the administration, the Pentagon, they want to have a parallel media, a propagandistic, pro-Trump media. Now, in many ways, that parallel universe already exists. It exists on TikTok and YouTube and all across podcasts, et cetera.
These people don't usually do a lot of reporting, but they do a lot of talking and opining. The Trump White House is trying to empower those voices, trying to empower those podcasters and these pro-Trump media figures, while at the same time punishing real newsrooms.
Geoff Bennett: And it's always useful, I think, for legacy media, for traditional media outlets to turn the mirror on itself. We have seen the rise of alternative media platforms. The scale of podcasting streams far outpaces the viewership of cable news these days, let's say.
So how can traditional news organizations remain trusted, authoritative, and relevant sources of news and information these days?
Brian Stelter: One of my bosses at CNN has said it's about being tough-minded and fair-minded, being tough and fair in the coverage, not shirking from the challenge that we face.
Ultimately, we do know that the Trump White House wants these fights with the media. And some Trump voters want this too. I live in a small farming community. My neighbor with the Trump flag that says "Revenge Tour," he probably wants the AP to be banned.
But many other Trump voters don't. And most people, regardless of party, they want to know what is true in the world. They want to know what is real in the world. So these efforts to push back the press, to punish the press, to investigate PBS, for example, to probe Comcast over diversity initiatives, all of these pressure points against the American media, they may ultimately come back to hurt the Trump White House, as people find they don't know what's going on, they can't find accurate information.
But, to your question, the answer is, we just have to be steady. We have to be steady and courageous during a perilous moment for the press.
Geoff Bennett: Brian Stelter of CNN, thanks so much. We appreciate it.
Brian Stelter: Thanks.
from Newsbusters - Welcome to NewsBusters, a project of the Media Research Center (MRC), America’s leading media watchdog in documenting, exposing Follow News Busters
Red Pill Pharma A psychological pharmaceutical that unlocks logic and reason offering a second chance at individualism.
Sourced by the Find us on telegram. Real News for Patriots of the United States of America. We share content that re-affirms our soulful connection to light, Truth, and the Constitutional God given rights of Freedom and Liberty.
No comments