Column: Media are already getting Trump's arraignment wrong - Los Angeles Times
By: LZ GrandersonColumnist (Los Angeles Times)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Trump lawyer Alina Habba repeated incendiary false claims on his behalf outside the federal courthouse in Miami on Tuesday.(Alex Brandon / Associated Press) ByLZ GrandersonColumnist June 13, 2023 5:04 PM PT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Trump is in legal trouble again. But then, he has been in legal trouble my entire life.
Starting with the Nixon Justice Department's housing discrimination lawsuit against his company back in 1973, Trump had been involved in more than 3,500 legal disputes before he even moved into the White House. Yes, some — such as the complaint against a tenant for not paying rent even though he had — were frivolous, but many, like the one brought by the Justice Department, weren't.
All of which should have been a red flag for the media. But it wasn't.
Instead, media executives put Trump on "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous"; they gave him his own reality TV show; and they allowed him to spew lies about President Obama's origins without producing a shred of evidence.
The debate over CNN's infamous recent Trump town hall made it seem as if "How do we cover Trump?" was a novel question. But New York newspapers ran his full-page ads effectively calling for the death penalty for the now-exonerated "Central Park Five" in 1989 even though their executives knew Trump could not be trusted. And they knew this because their newspapers had already been covering Trump for years.
The former president enters a not-guilty plea on federal felony charges that he improperly took hundreds of secret documents and obstructed government efforts to retrieve them.
We journalists can certainly use our sharp tongues and witty prose to eviscerate the cowards in Congress who are afraid to acknowledge that classified documents shouldn't be sprawled out on the floor of a Florida storage room. But the media were in the business of legitimizing Trump long before those red baseball caps became a thing.
Even now, much of the coverage of the former president's federal indictment is focused on its unprecedented nature. Yet the fact is that this is someone who has been in legal trouble for half a century.
"How do we cover Trump?" is not the question of the moment. That question should have been asked and answered long before he emerged as the Republican front-runner for 2024 or 2016.
Trump is now a factor in a fourth consecutive general election because sometime between "The Apprentice" and the 2016 primary, his import changed while his media coverage remained the same. This corrupt figure became the leader of a dangerous movement but continued to be treated like a diverting celebrity.
Back in 1991, two years after he suggested that Black and brown children should be executed for a crime they didn't commit, Trump was quoted as saying in reference to a Black accountant at one of his casinos: "Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day." And yet in 2011, executives allowed Trump to appear on "The View," the "Today" show and "Morning Joe" to question the legitimacy of the country's first Black president as if one had nothing to do with other.
He was good on TV, so Trump — who had coined the phrase "truthful hyperbole" decades before — didn't have to produce any evidence. Just ratings and clicks.
The nonstop coverage of his 2016 campaign sometimes featured an empty podium as media executives banked on the mere expectation that he would appear. Trump understood all of this. He also understood that millions of Americans felt voiceless. So he leveraged his celebrity to speak on their behalf with the help of an industry he understood how to manipulate all too well.
The media have been covering Trump and his legal woes for 50 years, and he knows we have yet to get it right. Thousands and thousands of lawsuits — for stiffing his contractors, for shutting off tenants' heat in the dead of winter — and yet he was always able to leverage his celebrity to say whatever he wanted on the air.
Maybe, instead of asking how we cover Trump, we should be asking why.
Why is there an empty podium on the screen? Why is a person who has been sued repeatedly for fraud allowed to question anyone's legitimacy without proof? And why are the media still letting Trump's tales wag the supposed watchdog?
@LZGranderson
Tags
Who is online
191 visitors
The media continues to let the country down.
Steve Schmidt made a good point in his latest video. Why were viewers shown what was the modern version of the OJ Bronco chase - an absurd "motorcade" of dozens of cars which escorted Trump to his court appearance , aka, arrest? There is a scene where the expressway is blocked off so Trump could pass by and we see hundreds of cars held up while the majestical Trump procession takes precedence on the road.
Of course the news channels all showed this pathetic "nod" to an accused felon.
At some point, probably soon, the media will fall back into treating Trump like a serious and accomplished politician and will get back to the "horse race" aspect of the coming election. All of which helps him.
he should be treated like Jim Jones
Or Leona Helmsley.
Didn't anyone see the Republican primary debates in 2016? Trump wasn't an unknown.
The media coverage of Trump, as a politician, served one purpose: to elect Clinton and Democrats. The problem is that the media completely ignored voters. The press has become accustomed to telling people what to think rather than listening.
Journalists read the polls and concoct a narrative to fit their own biases. But the last few elections have shown that polling is broken. The public ain't playing by the rules of the status quo. There are too many influencers competing with the press so journalists cannot rely on their ability to tell the public what to think. And journalists have lost the skill set needed to talk to people on the street.
What we're witnessing is the press searching for relevance. Blaming Trump won't revive the glory days of the press exerting control over elections, policy, and public opinion.
Nonsense. In 2015 and2016 Trump was given hundreds of millions of dollars worth of unearned air time. His entire rallies were shown on cable news channels. His mountainous personal faults and failings were papered over or ignored by the media. His bizarre rantings at the GOP debates were normalized by media eager to court his fandom.
One could make a plausible argument that media negligence got Trump elected in 2016.
Its not a new one. People who were paying attention in 2015-16 know that is exactly what happened. Were you paying attention?
Trump is receiving millions of dollars worth of free air time right now. But attempting to claim the coverage now (or in 2016) was complimentary and supportive is utterly bizarre. Outright denial of the past won't rewrite history.
The press was covering the Russian collusion story before the 2016 election. The Steele dossier had been leaked to the press before the 2016 election. Trump's real estate deals in the United States and internationally were being scrutinized and reported before the 2016 election. Trump's marketing scams, his 'university' scam, and branding scams were being scrutinized and reported before the 2016 election. Trump's bankruptcies, bank schemes, tax schemes, and business dealings were being scrutinized and reported before the 2016 election.
The press dug up plenty of dirt on Donald Trump. The press coverage of all of Trump's dirt didn't move the needle. Voters believed the alternative was a worse choice than Donald Trump, in spite of the press coverage. Voters seemed to revel in the apoplectic outrage of the press, elites, and political establishment.
Yes, a plausible argument can be made that media played a large role in Trump's election. But claiming press negligence elected Trump is just a crazy delusion. Bad press didn't prevent Trump's election and that's the reality media is trying to sweep under the rug. The press threw everything it had at Trump and couldn't keep Trump out of office.
After Trump's election how can anyone believe the press is relevant any longer? That's just crazy.
LOL. Those things were only covered for people who went looking for the coverage. The fact is the great majority of voters, particularly the ones who voted for Trump, were unaware of ANY of that. And the Steele Dossier was NOT in the news prior to the election. Donald Trump committed tax fraud , in conjunction with his mother and father, during the 1990's and early 2000's. You could find that in books and a few articles about him in 2016, but it certainly wasnt mentioned on television.
Had the press responsibly reported on Trump in 2015, such as calling out his birther lies as totally unacceptable for a presidential candidate, and on many other things, I dont think he would have been elected. But that didnt happen.
You have to remember that Hillary was an "accused felon" also because of the email scandal.
But until or unless he is convicted and jailed he is free to do as he wants.
He neither asks for nor pays for the attention he receives daily from the leftist MSM.
And you give him daily coverage in your seeds.
The press did exactly that. Claiming the press failed to cover the dirt on Trump is an outright fabrication. Some of that dirt was even a topic for the primary debates. You actually think Ted Cruz pulled punches? John Kasich didn't accept the results of the Republican primaries and campaigned against Trump after Trump won the nomination. A lot of the Republican establishment refused to attend the Republican convention because Trump won the primary and was the nominee. The New York Times published articles by establishment Republicans denouncing Trump; some even encouraging Republicans to vote for Clinton.
And on top of that we're supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton didn't talk about any of the dirt on Trump during the debates? Clinton, herself, failed to inform the public about Trump? Really?
None of the dirt on Trump moved the needle. So, maybe Trump's election wasn't only about Trump. With the press and Democrats coronating Clinton before the primaries and even with some establishment Republicans supporting Clinton; Clinton still lost.
100%. Cheerleader like Morning Joe did everything they could to promote him during the primaries. After all, the Clintons wanted Trump to win.
Once he sewed up the nomination, he became public enemy number one.
It is quite striking how you find a way to pin all his mountain of faults on the Democrats. You are still doing it up to this minute with your silly complaints about Democrats funding MAGA candidates.
I saw an interesting suggestion on twitter a little while ago. In response to Fox News slandering Biden with that chyron, the White House press secretary should stop accepting questions from the Fox correspondent at the press briefings. I think that would be totally appropriate.
More Hypocrisy, amazing. Did you become for or against banning an angry press during the time Jim Acosta was in the Whitehouse press pool?