The ongoing conflict between President Trump and the American news media has reached a critical juncture, demanding a concerted response. A situation arose when the White House excluded CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, accusing them of spreading ‘fake news.’ Major networks like ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox News refused to replace CNN in the presidential television pool. A federal judge has temporarily reinstated these organizations’ credentials, citing a lack of due process in their revocation. However, reporters found themselves denied entry the following day, leading to another court appeal. While the presidential pool resumed activities, broader issues linger.
Press Freedom and Presidential Influence
Conflicts surrounding press credentials, government terminology, Pentagon reporting rules, and federal influence over media highlight a crucial question: To what extent should a president control institutions that cover him independently? Resolving this requires more than legal or media decisions. Political leaders should endorse a bipartisan statement on presidential press freedom. Circulating this among Congress members, governors, and current or former Cabinet members could establish a bipartisan standard that transcends political affiliations.
The Importance of Institutional Independence
A Republican might find CNN’s treatment of Trump unfair yet believe a president shouldn’t penalize CNN for its work. Similarly, a Democrat might oppose Fox News but acknowledge no future Democratic president should exclude Fox. Press freedom endures only when its supporters uphold it across differing opinions. Major networks demonstrated this unity when the White House barred CNN from pool coverage, and other networks refused to take its place, underscoring the television press’s institutional independence. Even Fox News, excluded by Obama in 2009, now supports CNN in this situation, prioritizing institutional interests over politics.
Continuous and Independent Coverage
The president necessitates ongoing independent coverage, but the entire press corps cannot manage this. A few journalists must act as representatives in restricted spaces. A prolonged suspension of this system risks turning the White House into the sole source for presidential media. The press must assert independence while maintaining its role as an observer. Media organizations can cover available areas, increase content sharing, and potentially form a consortium of different outlets. When using official footage, broadcasters should label it as government-produced. Networks like Fox and Newsmax could support this initiative without endorsing specific journalism.
Presidential Power and Press Access
Recent incidents highlight a concerning trend of governmental influence over media access. Trump’s ‘fake news’ focus, the Associated Press ‘Gulf of America’ dispute, new Pentagon restrictions, and tensions with media companies under federal scrutiny collectively signal a broader issue. Addressing this requires action beyond journalism. A proposed statement would establish a principle limiting presidential power, separate from individual sentiments about media entities. It would affirm the president’s duty to respect credible news organizations’ independence. Consistent access standards should replace presidential approval based on editorial content.
A Unified Front for Press Freedom
Such a statement, supported by both Republicans and Democrats, would hold significant weight. It should challenge any public official to justify why a president could penalize established news outlets for unfavorable coverage. Trump’s tenure will end, passing the presidency and its precedents to another leader. Any enduring principle should preserve press independence, focusing not solely on media, but on the public they serve.
Dan Perry is a former London-based Europe-Africa editor and Middle East editor for the Associated Press, as well as the ex-chairman of the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem. He has authored two books.