Jim Acosta violated one of the oldest rules of journalism - Opinion
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
By producing a split decision, the election that was supposed to end all elections turned out to be fairly predictable. But it’s the day after that was unlike any other.
The Republican president, the likely speaker of the Democrat-controlled House and the Senate’s Republican majority leader each started Wednesday by talking about working together to get things done. They talked to each other privately and talked separately in public about what they thought they could accomplish for the country.
For most Americans, that would make for a very good day. Given the overheated environment leading up to the midterms and the fear among many that we are drifting toward an era of disunion and spreading political violence, bipartisan pledges to work together for the common good were like the sudden emergence of a bright candle flickering in the wind.
Alas, it was the last thing some members of the White House press corps wanted, so they tried to snuff it out.
The conduct of a handful of so-called reporters during President Trump’s news conference was disgraceful beyond measure. This is not journalism, this is narcissism.
Naturally, the boorish Jim Acosta of CNN was the instigator. As is his habit, Acosta doesn’t ask questions — he makes accusations and argues. Almost daily, he does it with the press secretary; Wednesday, he did it with the president.
“I want to challenge you,” Acosta began after Trump called on him. Trump realized he’d made a mistake, murmuring, “Here we go,” and Acosta didn’t disappoint.
He insisted that despite the president’s use of the word “invasion,” the caravan of Central American migrants “is not an invasion.”
He adopted a lecturing, I-know-best tone to declare that “they’re hundreds and hundreds of miles away; that’s not an invasion.”
Trump’s response should not have been necessary: “Honestly, I think you should let me run the country, you run CNN.”
After more back-and-forth, he called Acosta “a rude, terrible person” and said “CNN should be ashamed of itself.”
That should have been enough — Acosta got the attention he wanted and got Trump’s goat, giving his network video it could make hay out of for days. Besides, there were scores of other reporters raising their hands to be called on.
But Acosta wouldn’t give up the microphone and kept talking over Trump, trying to lob another grenade.
The president, clearly angry now and stepping away from the podium as if he might bolt the room, pointed at him and said forcefully, “That’s enough, that’s enough. Put down the mic.”
Finally, Acosta sat down, then stood up to argue again, interrupting another reporter. That reporter, from NBC, praised Acosta and picked up the baton by making his own accusation disguised as a question. He mentioned Trump’s attacks on Democrats and “asked” the president: Why are “you are pitting Americans against one another?”
Trump, to his credit, actually answered in a substantive way, but that didn’t satisfy because the reporter didn’t really ask a question. He too just wanted to make an accusation and argue. On camera.
There was a time not long ago when young journalists were taught not to become the story. Apparently, many news organizations have flipped that lesson on its head.
But we are witnessing something more insidious here than media trash talk. Plain and simple, we are watching expressions of personal hatred.
Yes, it’s true that most journalists lean far left and their bias sticks out like so many sore thumbs. That’s been true for a long time, but political bias is an insufficient explanation for the Jim Acostas of our time.
They hate Trump. They really, really hate him. There’s nothing professional about it.
They are not alone. Take a poll of almost any major newsroom in America and the vast majority of those working there, if they are being honest, will confess that they too can’t stand the existence or the sound of Trump.
Or try to imagine Acosta and his ilk behaving in similarly hostile fashion toward Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Keep trying, but you can’t imagine it because it never happened. Both of those pols lied to journalists repeatedly, yet you can bet 90 percent still voted straight Democratic.
Even if they didn’t like Obama or Clinton, the political reporters would never dare accuse them publicly of anything, argue with them or interrupt them. Even when skeptical, they were respectful.
Recall how Obama used to spend 10, 15 and even 20 minutes answering a single question — without interruption.
Many in the press corps may have found him overbearingly arrogant. They may have resented the way he looked down on them and bristled at critical stories or tough questions. They knew he started more leak investigations than any other president, and might have feared him because his Justice Department wiretapped a Fox News reporter during a leak case.
But they would never interrupt him or insult him or refuse to give up the microphone.
White House press credentials are not a universal right. There are implicit expectations of proper behavior, and the White House decision to suspend Acosta’s credential is warranted.
Just as Acosta can’t go into a movie theater and yell “Fire” when there is no fire, he should not have the right to hijack a presidential press conference to suit his own ego.
It is also long past time for his colleagues, including those from other outlets, to remind him that his shameful conduct is making all of them look bad. More important, scenes like Wednesday’s further erode the public’s already declining trust of the media and fuel resistance to the First Amendment.
The anti-Trump antics are no longer a sideshow. America has serious problems as well as dangerous enemies, and the mere prospect of Trump, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell working together is the best news we could have hoped for Wednesday.
Instead, it was overshadowed by a few narcissists chasing their own vanity.
By
Michael Goodwin
Tags
Who is online
537 visitors
Guess Jim forgot to change his diapers that morning.
I know the President didn't have a dictionary available:
Invasion: an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain. The President was right again.
E.A Indeed SO, His " Home " His Microphone, His Choice whom he would allow not only entrance but the right to Speak!
When he asked for HIS Microphone to be returned Failure to do so, and refusal to allow the " Authorized person to retrieve it " amounts to Theft!
IMO
Trump calls it 'fake news'...in actuality, it isn't news at all. MSM has become an entertainment and opinion driven machine. The five W's are dead. Too boring.
They stoke and encourage rude and obnoxious behaviors towards anything that they 'don't' like. We hear these fire driven opines constantly. They even report unsubstantiated stories - unallowable years ago, now totally acceptable.
They caress and pamper things that they do like. Stories about lying, rude and obnoxious behaviors from someone liked is glossed over and excuses are made...then all becomes quiet.
True journalism is dead. Everyone has an opinion...MSM wants to not only share their opinion, they want to tell you how you should feel.
Why is revealing Trump to be a liar a "liberal" thing?
Are conservatives unconcerned with the truth?
If your comment had anything to do with the topic - i.e. Costa's pathetic actions under the guise of a "Reporter" - it might be worth responding too.
Reporters do just that - they report things, utilizing facts. Costa attempted to attack Trump by egging him on with "semantics" - which is where Costa lost because he was voicing "his" opinion not based on facts.
Acosta was using trump's own words and asking him about it.
trump called out another reporter calling her remarks racist. A black woman asked about him using the term nationalist, as to some, it has racist meanings.
trump never answers questions, he just tries to turn the table on others.
So what are people saying? How dare they use trump's own words against him.
I am sick of people acting like poor little trump is being attacked. Not one person on the right has condemned trump for his boorish, nasty behavior. Nor anything he said to them.
It is not a one way street yet people are acting like it is.
Wow - didn't hear/see that "racist" thing during the press conference. And, yes, for whatever reason, the journalist did ask about "White Nationalism" - which is racist, whereas "Nationalist" is not.
You are the one claiming this happens because the media is liberal. So again, what does "liberal" have to do with showing Trump is not telling the truth?
Agree to disagree as most racists consider themselves nationalists, but I will not derail your seed with any more remarks on that.
Nationalism, as I was taught, is the desire to have political independence within a country. I'm an Independent, so, using that "definition", does that mean independents are Nationalists since we desire smaller government?
Hmmm - thanks for the information.
And I said "Liberal" where?
Jim Acosta is Sean Hannity. The only difference is that Hannity is open about his bias and doesn't pretend to be objective.
I think that's a fair assessment. Acosta looks like a man who wants his own show.
An amusing part of the story is watching CNN, so self righteously vocal about Trump's lying, protect Acosta's lying.
Acosta claimed on Anderson Cooper's show that he never touched the intern, despite video evidence that he did. Anderson Cooper of course, didn't offer any pushback to Acosta's lie. Then CNN, like a the third world propaganda machine it so desperately wants to be, shows an edited clip of Acosta and takes out the part where he touches the intern.
Man, have you ever lost it.
The young lady tried to grab the mic out if the reporter's hand. End of story.
When someone is holding a microphone, and talking into it at the time, they instinctively reject anyone's attempt to take the microphone from them. This effect is seen thousands of times wherever people try to take the mic from one another in order to be heard.
Acosta could have been a little less persistent in trying to probe Trump, but the business with the microphone is entirely on the White House. Entirely.
Once again the right just make bald fools of themselves.
Let's keep this simple.
Did Acosta touch her or no?
It looks like he placed his arm over hers. She was the aggressor.
What the hell are you looking at?
Did he touch her or not?
Did she touch him or not?
She reached for the microphone - he brushed her off. She reached and placed her hand on the mic and he pulled away and "nudged" her away.
Yes - he touched her.
Why are you trying to ignore the fact that she initiated the contact?
You do know that it was her job to retrieve that microphone and pass it on to the next reporter, don't you?
That would happen after his question was answered.
He had asked his question, it was a answered and was told he was done. He didn't like the answer and held a tantrum to attempt to get his way .
The facts disagree with you. He is supported by both the White House Press Corps and CNN.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/08/white-house-suspends-press-pass-cnns-jim-acosta-after-testy-exchange-with-trump/?utm_term=.c096f7b99468
Oh please, the press corps and CNN would support Acosta in this if he actual hit her with a closed fist and tore her dress. I saw what happened as it hapoened
I watched the "press conference" live.
I saw no tantrum, stubbornness maybe, ( it's the hallmark of good journalism, aka Woodward, et al )
I saw no assault.
The President did not need to match stubbornness with rudeness and ridicule,
He diminished the office of the Presidency, not Acosta or any other reporter he insulted, cut off or talked over repeatedly.
If you are having trouble remembering what you saw, here is the WH transcript, so you yourself can count how many times he was interrupted versus how many times
he interrupted others and never answered their questions...
I do believe the point of a press conference is to answer questions, this one was clearly called to divert attention from how many seats the GOP lost in the House
and declare a clear loss a "victory".
Nobody would support that action, so stop being dramatic.
If someone from the right laid there hands on some intern /aid the left would be going nuts. Now if you accosted them with a cigar ...they might let it go.
What? He got his question and then had a tantrum after President Trump didn't respond to his second bated question.
Obviously you only seen what you wanted to.
I can pretty much guarantee that if that happened everyone in that room would have kicked Acosta's ass.
I have several children and many grandchildren,
I can assure you that what I saw may have been unnecessary and easily avoided,
but does not qualify as a tantrum.
That doesn't change the fact that he laid his hand on her, and as I said if someone from the right did that we would have the Liberal snowflakes having a epiphany.
His actions were like ….mansplaining tenfold.
What next, describe it as a karate chop? It was clearly his wrist which "landed" or brushed on the inside of her elbow, hand open with palm exposed to the camera.
After she clearly completely covers Acosta's hand with hers - she instigated contact and he flinched first.
I don't see assault in either action.
Bingo.
Should that matter?
It must be taken into consideration. The situation would not have happened if she had not reached for the microphone while Jim Acosta was still speaking.
She did 2 things at once.
She put her hand over Acosta's hand on the microphone and
she was moving in between Acosta and the POTUS.
Acosta reacted by moving slightly to his right to maintain eye contact with the President
and he reached out to block her with his left hand/arm from moving further into his space facing the President.
He did not grab, push or touch her, at most his wrist brushed the inside of her elbow, saying "stop".
I've seen the video clip. To say that it was assault is laughable.
Apparently I was also assaulted with a shopping cart last evening...................
He was told to give up the mic and he wouldn't. So, she didn't have a lot of choice. In my opinion, a real man doesn't put up a physical fight with a woman in that scenario. It doesn't matter if she touched him incidentally first. He's a bully.
How can he possibly be a bully if she initiated the situation? Jim Acosta was polite but firm with her. Trump was telling her to muzzle the press and Acosta wasn't going to go without a fight. You agree with Trump and he has told you to not like CNN, so it isn't surpising that you are taking her side.
He was pushing Trump for an answer to a question that was inconvenient to his current talking point, but that is part of a job for the White House press pool, especially when the POTUS is as evasive and intellectually dishonest as Donald Trump is. If he didn't do it then he wasn't doing his job as a member of the 4th estate. Those reporters aren't there to mindlessly swallow every claim that the White House feeds them without question. Politicians and the press have a naturally adversarial relationship and the Constitution is on the side of the press so that we the citizens are kept informed of the activities of those that we elect and who govern the country.
SHE touched Acosta, invading his space.
I have watched the video of the event, even the one that the WH is supposed to have doctored to show evidence for their reason to suspend Acosta's pass, and the all clearly show that when the woman reached for the mic in Acosta's hand, she also grabbed part of his hand while trying to pull the mic out of his hand, as which time he pulled away from her. He never initiated touching her in any way.
It is one thing to belittle and ridicule Acosta for being pushy in his questioning, but, making false accusations of accosting and inappropriately touching the woman is over the line. And there are witnesses who have already attested to the fact that Acosta never initiated any touching toward the woman.
But, in order to show their devotion to their King Trump, the GOP lemmings and lap dogs will go along with any lie that Trump & Co. throw out there.
And NO!! I am NOT a Democrat, so don't embarrass yourself by making that false accusation about me as well.
It is all a lie.
The fact the the White House press secretary is actually promoting a doctored video (from a known conspiracy theorist) and a lie should be grounds for termination.
I totally agree. Trump will trump up any kind of lie that will draw attention away from him and put the blame on someone else. Lying to Trump is as natural as the breath he draws. And he uses his lies to further his own agenda, even at the expense of those who are most loyal to him. He demands loyalty from everyone else, but, extends none to anyone else. There are many who are now beginning to see him for the A-hole he really is, and others turn a blind eye in order not to feel disappointed in their expectations of him.
Trump sees himself as President being above the law and the Constitution. He snubs his nose at both, and laughs at his base who put their party loyalty before loyalty to their country.
Sad.
This is about Acosta - not Trump.
Yes, it's about Acosta but we wouldn't be talking about Acosta if it weren't for Trump, his vile behavior and his gas-lighting, lying staff.
Sorry Pat - that dog don't hunt. Stick to the topic which is Acosta please.
Ooops...sorry, I forgot this was your article.
Well, if the comments on this article don't make Abbott and Costello look like Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Shayne - it's more fun than watching a movie. He did! She did! She did first! He touched her! She touched him! He assaulted her! I saw it live! You saw an edited version! CNN edited it! No, the WH edited it! .....
Now to watch the kids in the primary school next door for relief.
E.A Yes you are absolutely right
But can we " Play a game " and talk a little about the " Legalities " here?
I would be in a position to talk about the legalities if I had seen the clip of the press conference - my comment was based on the back-and-forth commenting above.
ok My Apologies I thought you seen the Video posted, maybe after you get a chance to do so, take care!
E.A Here is the CGTN, from where I am I can see Previous post video in their library, maybe you can also ::
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkWDAY8k0jw
Sorry E.A. I should have told you - YouTube is blocked where I am. I'm a Canadian expat and have been living in China for more than 12 years.
E.A ok is this Site Blocked also?
https://www.cgtn.com/
Thanks for that link - it worked for me and is quite interesting although there seems to be a lot of Chinese propaganda on it. I watched the video of the Melbourne terrorist knife attack on it. The previous thing you posted was a YouTube, which is blocked here, even if it was on that same site.
E.A You are most welcome, what Site is " propaganda free " :-)
Yes and if you go to the Video Search you might be ably to see what might not be available to you elsewhere, have Fun!
Every time Acosta gets the mic, it's clear he knows he's on television because the performance starts. It's supposed to be his job to report the news, not get in an argument with the president or press secretary, not try to ask 3, 4, or more questions when it's supposed to be 2. The microphone does not belong to him. Getting in a tug of war with a female intern over a microphone that is not his just makes him look like a bully. Monopolizing the press conference over his colleagues does the same thing.
There are rules that the reporters are to follow in a Presidential press conference, and if they refuse to follow the rules, then being banned is justifiable, even though the leftists do their damndest to politicize it.
So, it turns out that the doctored edited misleading video that rightwngers have been harping, wringing their hands and blathering about for days now was a no good fake straight from Info Wars. Talk about your false flag operations! The Right is now having to manufacture their daily doses of patented fake outrage out of whole cloth. Many commenting above above plainly must be either fools or liars...
Yawnnnnn. Now that you're done, stick to the topic.