The Trump administration has been active since its return to the White House introducing a plethora of executive orders, including but not limited to: halting federal aid, increasing federal funding towards border control after declaring a national emergency, and renaming “The Gulf of Mexico” to “The Gulf of America.” The Trump administration now also has a new focus, which is challenging legacy media’s role in the White House.
Timeline of Media Events
Feb. 1: The Department of Defense announced and introduced an “annual media rotation program” that would swap Pentagon press corps workers and their respective outlets.
NBC News, The New York Times, National Public Radio (NPR), Politico, Cable News Network (CNN), The Washington Post, The Hill and War Zone were issued a memo from the Pentagon stating that they had until Feb. 14 to vacate the Pentagon.
The Trump administration began replacing legacy media outlets with alternative “right-leaning outlets.”
Feb. 7: John Ullyot, assistant to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, announced that alternative outlets set to replace legacy media will include Newsmax, the Washington Examiner, the Daily Caller, and tThe Free Press.
Feb. 14: The White House issued a statement banning Associated Press news reporters from the Oval Office and Air Force One, with the exception of photographers. This ban was following the refusal of the AP to refer to the “Gulf of Mexico” as the “Gulf of America.”
Government agencies in the U.S. began to implement the name change. However, other countries are keeping the original name.
Feb. 21: The AP responded with a lawsuit against three Trump administration officials citing an infringement on their right to free speech under the First Amendment. In the lawsuit, the AP alleges retaliation over word choice and “editorial independence.”
Feb.24: Judge Trevor McFadden rejected the AP’s request to have their access restored to Presidential events citing that the news organization didn’t face “irreparable harm.” McFadden urged the Trump administration to reconsider.
Feb. 25: White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that the White House Correspondents Association would no longer be in charge of determining which media outlets are included within the White House press pool; this would now be the Trump administration’s prerogative.
With the AP being a highly respected news organization, and designated style guide for media professionals there has been an uproar in the world of journalism. One person who is dismayed by the recent events in D.C. is Caitlin Carlson, chair of the communication and media department at Seattle University. Carlson talked about the implications ousting reporters from government events creates for media professionals.
“I get the idea that it is a privilege, not a right, to cover the White House. However, I think there are some legacy media that have been covering the White House in a nonpartisan, unbiased way for decades, and I would include the AP among that list. So I think the real harm is, I think, about the relationships, the sources, the expertise that those reporters have developed,” Carlson said.
Carlson shared how the impact of removing the AP is not only harmful to them but also harmful to other media outlets that use it as a reliable source. It harms the reliability and the foundation of credibility.
“When you keep them from being able to access the briefing room or these different things. It really harms the news and information that not just the AP but all of the different outlets that rely on the AP as a wire service,” Carlson said
What Is Next For The Media?
As the Trump administration slowly redefines its relationship with legacy media through alternative outlets, there has been a discussion of the new reality of “freedom of the press.”
Jim Hanson, assistant teaching professor in the communication and media department and the director of the speech and debate team, shared his insight on how controlling the media is reflective of an authoritarian government.
“My view of this situation is that we have become an authoritarian country and it’s just a matter of the progress that the Trump administration is making to dismantle the current government,” Hanson said.
He talked about multiple administration actions as indicative of this process, such as removing military chiefs and inspectors, which has brought some backlash to the Trump administration. This, as Hanson speculates, has brought the attention of the left-leaning press, which harms President Trump’s image.
Hanson argues that strong influence over the media helps bolster Trump’s favor and avoid accountability.
“They’re cutting, spending on things that was already authorized legally by Congress and in terms of the press now. Well, you’ve got to control the press so that they don’t criticize how much power and in fighting against what they are doing. So they’re excluding people like the AP,” Hanson said.
Ruby Batch, a fourth-year political science major at Seattle U and vice president of the Political Science Club, weighed in on how setbacks in the press affect politics nationally. Batch expanded on how in the past authoritarian governments have implemented control over the media.
“This is a pretty textbook for authoritarian styles of government, and we’ve seen it in other countries like Hungary recently, India, and some cases in Germany with the rise of the AFD [Alternative For Germany]. It’s going to make politics and doing counter-action toward Trump much more difficult. It’s gonna make his actions more obscured,” Batch said.
The Alternative for Germany (AFD) is a far-right political party in Germany that many have criticized as authoritarian. The party was recently endorsed by Elon Musk.
Similarly, Batch believes that this helps Trump cover up his actions, and boost his image. This control over the media could harm the media’s freedom of the press.
Jim Clune, lecturer in the communication and media department at Seattle U, discussed how the issue of freedom of the press has not been attacked yet but sees the authoritarian influence that is weighing over the media.
Clune mentioned that using intimidation and control toward the media is the new normal for today’s press corps. Denying access to the White House and by removing legacy media outlets from the Pentagon is a form of control to gain more power.
“It can have a chilling effect, is what I’m talking about, and we’ve seen that, as I said, with these other authoritarian governments. They start with authority, they start with intimidation, they start with denying access, and then they actually start buying [media outlets],” Clune said.
Batch shared that this bullying is unsurprising, seeing that President Trump has been very vocal in the past about his distrust of the left-leaning media outlets and labeled them as “fake news.”
“He’s always made claims about them reporting disinformation about him even though most of the stories, especially towards CNN, MSNBC, more center-left outlets. He’s always been antagonistic towards them, so I don’t think it was shocking that he would want to get more favorable outlets reporting on it,” Batch said.
Carlson expanded on the chilling effect issue, which is negatively impacting the news and working journalists.
“So what the message it sends is, if you do something the administration doesn’t like, you will be punished, and so does that, in turn, mean that outlets or individual journalists are motivated to cover things in a certain way, so as not to bear the brunt of that retaliation and so I think it creates a chilling effect,” Carlson said.
A new reality concerning how journalists will maintain their commitment to journalism in legacy media. Overall changing how news and politics should be approached nationally.
What Will This Look Like for Upcoming Journalists?
The upcoming generation of reporters and journalists will face responsibilities and challenges that would not have been present without the Trump administration.
Hanson shared how he feels that the newer generation of journalists, especially the ones with aspirations to go into national politics, will have to face new obstacles but they should not waver.
“For the journalism students at Seattle University that want to do that kind of reporting, it is going to be a very fine line between doing analysis and criticism that doesn’t upset the administration while at the same time allowing themselves to have a flow of information and knowledge to get their materials out there,” Hanson said.
He believes that journalists going into political coverage will have to face a new wave of criticism and personal attacks and might even face persecution.
“It’s going to be a very tough period in our history. It’s really sad,” Hanson said.
Clune is optimistic that media professionals and journalists alike will honor their commitment to practicing journalism and not become compliant in the face of the new administration.
“It’s the basic values of journalism, you know. It’s really striving to gather information and tell the truth as you see it. That’s the way that you know. That’s the way that you overcome authoritarianism. Eventually, you have to tell the truth, because they’re not always telling it,” Clune exclaimed.
Basil Cain, a second-year public affairs major at Seattle U chimed in on the recent events in the media and expressed his sentiments on the importance of freedom of speech.
“Freedom of speech is vitally important to the American people, as it holds back the government and corporations from silencing those who criticize them, which leads to progress and protection of the American people’s rights and lives,” Cain said.
Cain has observed an intense relationship between the current president and the media over the last few years.
“I have seen many instances in interviews and White House Press conferences where Trump has been blatantly rude to reporters trying to ask him questions, by calling the questions stupid or insulting the reporters, along with reporting to certain reporters as ‘fake news’ in an attempt to discredit them,” Cain said.
The Trump administration has only been in office for three weeks yet in such a short time, redefined its relationship with the media. This impact has contributed to challenges for both current and aspiring journalists. In the end, amid the new constraints of the administration journalists are tasked with continuing their commitments to journalism.
