"Tone" deaf — how Trump coverage keeps marring pandemic reporting
the Normalizing Olympics
 |
Stay healthy.
Be kind.
If President Barack Obama had overseen the deaths of 100,000 Americans during the Ebola outbreak in 2014, do you think many Beltway journalists would have given him high marks for his "tone"? Me neither. Yet that’s what unfolded this week in the wake of White House briefing where Trump warned of 100,000-plus coronavirus deaths in the U.S. — journalists marveled at how serious and "somber" he was. It's like the Normalizing Olympics.
Or, to mix metaphors, it's a Moby Dick-like pursuit of a mythical 'presidential' Trump. That pointless search began weeks before Trump was even inaugurated, as Beltway observers calmly predicted that the Oval Office would soon change him and he'd grow into a statesman. Instead, Trump has unraveled in public view for more than three years while the press clings to this fantasy that underneath the narcissist and liar and bully is a man who wants to lead.
Even if Trump unveiled a completely new approach to governance and forever stashed away his usual array of insults, threats, and lies, that's no reason to give him credit. Especially not during a pandemic, when he wasted an entire month dithering about the coronavirus, famously announcing we'd soon have "zero" cases. (The government still hasn't secured enough test kits and respirators for the mounting crisis.)
The media’s Trump failures are all about tiptoeing around the truth and not being honest with news consumers. For instance, the New York Times this week published a lengthy and worthy article about how Trump has regularly lashed out at women in public office during the current crisis, much more so than men. Yet nowhere in the piece were the words "misogyny" or "misogynist" mentioned, because the Times and most of the press refuse to use clarity when analyzing Trump's deformed character. That's why the Times newsroom is not allowed to call Trump a "liar" or a "racists," even though he is both, as well as a textbook misogynist.
It’s that purposefully timid Trump reporting that mars much of the pandemic coverage. Responding to online critiques of the media's performance this week, one Politico editor, Blake Hounshell, responded, "You know, enough of this. It has taken entire teams of journalists to tell this story in all its many facets, and the press is by and large doing it extraordinarily well as the media industry collapses around them." He's right, the press has largely done an "extraordinary" job covering this once-in-a-century emergency. But in terms of the Trump pandemic coverage, that has been almost uniformly lacking, and by far the weakest link of the virus reporting.
Just look at the media rush to shower Trump with hosannas after he supposedly changed his "tone" on the deadly pandemic. "The grim-faced president who appeared in the White House briefing room for more than two hours beside charts showing death projections of hellacious proportions was coming to grips with a reality he had long refused to accept," the New York Times reported with urgency.
Over at CNN, White House correspondent Jim Acosta, following the pandemic briefings, announced Trump now "gets it," stressing, "I have never seen the president like this." Added NBC's Kelly O'Donnell, "The tone and seriousness was different today."
Oh thank goodness. Trump had finally come to terms with the significance of a pandemic that will likely claim 20-plus million U.S. jobs and perhaps 100,000 American lives.
To the surprise of nobody, days after Trump's "serious" briefing, he was back to his usual public antics while ostensibly addressing the national emergency — he bragged about his popularity on Facebook, mocked assembled journalists, tried to create a diversion by turning Wednesday's pandemic briefing into a press conference about a new drug trafficking initiative launched by the Department of Defense, and accused Democrats of launching a “witch hunt” against him. Trump also returned to taunting Democrats on Twitter, specifically a U.S. senator from New York, the epicenter of the deadly outbreak.
All if this is completely predictable, and all of this is why the press should refrain from claiming a mad man like Trump has changed his ways, or embraced a serious, somber “tone.”
Back in 2017, when Trump gave his first address to the nation from Congress (technically it was not a State of the Union since he had just been sworn in), cable news discussions of the address included more than 300 references to the optics of his speech -- including mentions of a “pivot," “presidential,” “reset,” and “tone," according to Media Matters. (Even the White House was reportedly surprised at how fervently the press praised the speech.) Trump, of course, did nothing following the speech to "pivot" towards more "presidential" behavior.
More recently in March, CNN's Dana Bash, after watching one of Trump's erratic pandemic briefings, showered him with praise: "He is being the kind of leader that people need, at least in tone, today, and yesterday, in a tone that people need and want and yearn for in times of crisis and uncertainty." Over subsequent days and weeks though, Trump proceeded to mislead the nation about a possible virus cure, lie about dismantling the White House's pandemic team, accused hospital workers of stealing much-needed surgical masks, and told governors on a conference call that he hadn't heard complaints about a lack of coronavirus tests.
Trump's never going to change. It's the press’ job to accurately describe who is now, and who he'll be for always.
GOOD STUFF:
One of the press mantras that I've been focusing on since Trump was elected is for journalists to accurately describe what they see in front of them, instead of hiding behind purposefully vague language. Thankfully, The Boston Globe this week tore off the blinders and in wonderfully clear language explained the Trump fiasco, in an unsigned editorial, "A president unfit for a pandemic":
It’s not too much for Americans to ask of their leaders that they be competent and informed when responding to a crisis of historic proportions. Instead, they have a White House marred by corruption and incompetence, whose mixed messages roil the markets and rock their sense of security. Instead of compassion and clarity, the president, in his near-daily addresses to the nation, embodies callousness, self-concern, and a lack of compass.
FUN STUFF — BECAUSE WE ALL NEED A BREAK:
Willie Nile, “Little Bit of Love”
Boy, does New York need Willie Nile right now. Struggling through one of its darkest hours, the city’s adopted son continues his love affair with Gotham via his 13th album, New York at Night, which is set for a May 15 release.
I’ve seen Nile many, many times in the city, usually jumping onstage for the encore at a James Maddock show, his longtime friend. There’s something magical about how Nile carries his role of rock `n roll ambassador, and how when he steps up to the microphone the whole vibe in the room ignites. Like Bruce Springsteen, Nile not only believes in the power of rock ‘n roll, he lives the life as a relentless prophet, preaching the drums/bass/guitar gospel every chance he gets — the gospel of redemption and love, and most importantly today, the gospel of faith.
| 31 | 20 |
His profiteer friends are making a lot of money off this battle between the states and other countries for supplies. It is very Halliburton/Black Water-esque Why use an easily replicated test from the WHO when companies can make a bundle from the government? I believe he secretly revels in the idea of so many deaths. He is not as smart as Ted Bundy, but he is a narcissistic sociopath. It is also very Ayn Rand, though i think he is hoping for more Dem deaths...
I'll be even more blunt...the WH and more than a few anchors will shoulder more than a small portion of the blame for the slow-moving horror show that is overtaking our country. Had they vetted Trump before the primaries, he never would have risen to the presidency. Had they put the same level of diligence into Trump's tax returns as Hillary's emails, we never would have reached the point of impeachment. Had they covered the Mueller report as it was written (vs as interpreted by Barr), there would have been far more support far earlier for impeachment. Had they continued to question why Jared Kushner had an instant messaging relationship with MBS, we might understand the danger that this soulless puppet has wrought over the past 3.5 years. Had they forced Trump to answer questions about the dangers posed by the looming pandemic instead of allowing contradictory and ignorant answers and deflections to stand, 100,000 lives or more would not be in jeopardy. Had they forced answers to the absence of PPE, we wouldn't have doctors falling ill and dying. History will rightfully harshly judge those who had the opportunity to act as the final rail of democracy, protecting the vulnerable from an administration that, with reckless negligence or deliberate malice, are allowing tens of thousands to die. My hope is that a fearless writer will document, naming names, those in the media who so shamefully abdicated their fundamental role in our society, and ignored empathy for access.