With 100 days back in office, it’s fair to say that President Trump is leaving his mark. That hasn’t necessarily been a positive thing for the media or journalism, however, as the Trump administration’s second iteration has been even more hostile to the press than the first, and it has many experts alarmed.
Examples are myriad, and include (but aren’t limited to):
- Trump banned Associated Press reporters from White House news conferences for refusing to rename the Gulf of Mexico.
- Lawsuits have been filed against ABC News and CBS, among others, with some having settled.
- Trump’s Federal Communications Commission has threatened or initiated investigations into broadcasters.
- The administration reportedly wants to cut funding for NPR and PBS.
- The administration has tried to shut down Voice of America.
And while presidential administrations often spar with members of the media—Richard Nixon, perhaps most notably, was also hostile to the press—the Trump administration is taking this hostility to whole new levels, media industry experts argue.
“What stands out to me is that this is a concerted, multipronged campaign against ethical journalists and the independent press,” says Caroline Hendrie, executive director of the Society of Professional Journalists. “We’re looking at this as a strategy of a death by a thousand cuts—take it all together, and we’re seeing an assault on transparency, accountability, and the public’s right to know.”
The goal, Hendrie says, is fairly simple: Boost Trump’s agenda and slap down any voice that pushes back against it. “They want to delegitimize anyone who contradicts his narrative or the narrative of the administration,” she says.
Using the levers of government to not only influence coverage but also punish news outlets raises “more than red flags,” Hendrie adds. “It’s raising very legitimate alarms that our First Amendment free press rights are in danger in this country.”
Part of a broader attack on expertise
Gabriel Kahn, professor of professional practice of journalism at the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Journalism, says attacks on the press coming from a sitting administration have “never been so blatant or severe, at least over the past 80 years.”
However, Kahn says it’s important to think of the attack on the press as only one part of the issue. “You need to see the attacks on journalism and science and higher education as a part of the same piece,” he says. “It’s an attack on expertise, on independent thought.”
He adds that many news organizations haven’t done themselves any favors in how they’ve responded to the administration’s treatment. Specifically, he cites some newspapers’ reluctance (or refusal) to endorse a presidential candidate during the 2024 election, the reining in of opinion writers, and the censoring of news stories to curry favor with the Trump team.
According to Kahn, “obeying in advance” and “kowtowing to the administration,” which is also happening at major universities and big law firms, risks doing more harm than good for media outlets. “Major corporate journalism interests have chosen the illusion of some sort of short-term relief over the long-term damage they’re doing to their brands,” he says.
If there’s anything good that’s come out of Trump’s treatment of the press, Kahn says, it’s that it has “highlighted how fragile the free press is. We’ve taken so much for granted for so long. [The administration has] demonstrated to the American people how important it is to have a free, independent press.”
No comments