The state of journalism in the era of Donald Trump has suffered an alarmingly rapid descent into submissiveness to power and capitulation to the threats of an aspiring authoritarian whose dependence on, and hostility toward, the media has long been openly and loudly expressed.
Click here to post this article on Twitter or Click here to post on Bluesky
In just the few short months of his reoccupation of the White House, Trump has demonstrated his disgraceful disregard for the Constitution's protections of a free press by banning media outlets that have angered him (Associated Press, Reuters), dismantling independent agencies (Voice of America, Radio Free Europe), declaring critical media illegal (MSNBC, CNN), and reshaping the White House press room to align with his radical MAGA agenda.
SEE THIS: Trump Declares Himself King of the White House Press Corps, Will Now Decide Who Can Question Him
in the midst of this media dismemberment, Eric Wemple of the Washington Post (which is owned by Trump flunky Jeff Bezos) has published an article that presumes to be an objective analysis of the the left-leaning cable news network, MSNBC. But it's headline gives away it's inherent bias: "MSNBC in five words: 'I could not agree more'" He began the article saying that...
"Over the first 100 days of the second Trump administration, CNN has erupted in regular shoutfests over the latest Trump outrage. Fox News, too, has had its moments of internal combustion, especially on its highest-rated show, 'The Five,' where rotating co-host Jessica Tarlov often snipes at her conservative peers. As for MSNBC: Does anyone ever debate stuff on this network? To get closer to an answer, I decided to gulp roughly 18 hours of MSNBC programming"
So Wemple is complaining that MSNBC doesn't have the the "shoutfests" that Fox News and CNN have. And that's supposed to be a bad thing? He also suggests that Jessica Tarlov - one liberal against four Trump-fluffers - constitutes balance. His premise is that MSNBC is a Democratic echo chamber that features "Vast expanses of predictable programming in which people passionately agree with one another" that Trump is a bad person and president.
That, however, is a hard position to argue with. What good is there to say about a president who has crashed the economy, abandoned longtime allies, embraced totalitarian foes, fought against the interests of working class Americans, and relentlessly seeks to enrich himself and his billionaire benefactors?
In Wemple's article he claims to have watched 18 hours straight of MSNBC. But he only posts 15 time-stamped observations of that viewing, That's less than one per hour. And they don't even support his premise. For instance, he claims that MSNBC is stacked with liberal hosts and guests. But he acknowledges that they have Republicans in those roles, including host Michael Steele, Susan Del Percio, Brendan Buck, and Tim Miller. He left out hosts Joe Scarborough and Nicolle Wallace.
Wemple also claimed that MSNBC doesn't book guests who support Trump, saying that they are "opting for Republicans that give it the patina of balance, even though those voices don’t represent Trumpism.". But he himself notes that Trump advisor Stephen Miller, GOP Rep. Victoria Spartz, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, all appeared on the network during his 18 hour taste test. And anti-Trump Republicans are the minority who wouldn't have a platform, but for MSNBC.
Virtually every criticism that Wemple has of MSNBC applies much more accurately to Fox News that has zero Democratic hosts. MSNBC doesn't avoid contrarian debate. They ARE the contrarian debate. Much of the rest of the media, including WaPo, has succumbed to Trumpism. Wemple closed his hackery by saying that...
"In pre-Trump times, MSNBC’s current programming model would have been outright journalistic fraud. In Trump days, not so much — and we have daily proof over at CNN: The segments featuring that network’s Trump-supporting contributors are loud, chaotic and poisoned by frequent distortions. At least CNN viewers get to hear the pro-Trump arguments in all their fact-deprived glory, however. I lean toward the CNN model, but not enough to strain my calves."
REALLY? Wemple leans toward CNN's "loud, chaotic," "poisoned," "fact-deprived" "distortions"? And what part of that does he regard as credible journalism? He is actually advocating that news networks air noisy, blatant falsehoods as some sort of exercise in balance. He thinks that viewers will benefit from being lied to, so long as it's done by screaming right-wingers who emulate Trump's infantile emotional infirmity.
If Wemple wants to watch pro-wrestling style face-offs by shouting partisans, that's up to him. But he shouldn't push his bone-headed ideas on others, or use them as a model for the principles of professional journalism. Fox News has always been useless as a source for honest news. And CNN has recently joined them in the gutter. America doesn't need another network that traffics in anger and lies.
RELATED STORIES:
