Media Bias against Trump Becomes More Obvious

Nothing the presence of media prejudice against a Republican president is hardly remarkable.  For fifty years, at least, from Richard Nixon on, the liberal press has zeroed in on the foibles, imaginary and real, of GOP office holders in a way not experienced by Democratic chief executives.

The usually fawning coverage given Democrat Barack Obama is a recent contrast.

Recognizing that press assaults on Republican presidents hardly began with Donald Trump does not that mean that they are of the same kind,  however.  Plainly, they contain a level of antagonism, even hostility, not seen since the days of the Nixon presidency.

There is an irony in the liberal media’s treatment of the new White House occupant.  Trump, after all, is the least conservative Republican president in many decades.

But Trump, like Nixon before him, has singled out members of the press for personal attacks.  In response, the “mainstream” media, to put it starkly, has taken the assaults “personally” and responded in kind.  Thus, for instance, when President Trump states his belief that millions of illegal immigrants voted against him last November, the news’ reports not merely the allegation but insert an editorial label in the lead, as in “the President falsely claimed…”  Again, the opinion is contained in the supposed news story, not on the editorial page.

By so doing, the media is making a very big mistake.  The error is not the accuracy of the characterization of Trump’s remarks but the undeniable perception that the press is blatantly biased.  On a personal level, the motivation is understandable.  No one cares to have his integrity or professionalism challenged, as Trump has done repeatedly.  But, by making its antagonism so obvious, participating media outlets further damage their already tarnished image for reliability.  It’s as if they’ve been taunted by Trump into throwing off any cloak of impartiality.  They have vindicated the President’s attacks upon them.

In the old days, liberals controlled the media just as they do today, but press bias was much less transparent and therefore much more effective in influencing public opinion in favor of candidates and policies on the Left.

Back then, as now, the New York Times was a key molder of media crusades.  Its masthead proclaimed:  All the News That’s Fit to Print.  A National Review wag observed that, in practice, the slogan actually meant “all the news that fits”.  In other words, the liberal publication printed good stories about the left and refused to publish pieces that put the Right in a good light.  It’s not that the positive stories were false.  Rather, it was that the Times ignored “the other side”.  Thus, the bias in practice was not apparent; hence its effectiveness.

Subtle bias, at least for the sake of honesty, is evidently no longer sufficient.  In this day of blunt expressiveness, members of the media feel emboldened to tell everyone what they really think.

President Donald Trump is understandably appreciative.