As an alleged “enemy of the people,” I can’t treat the presidential savaging of the media as some political topic du jour.
But Donald Trump’s unprecedented attack on the honesty, ethics, credibility and patriotism of the mainstream media is so much more than personal. It’s a malevolent, narcissistic, deconstructive strategy that should frighten anyone who treasures democratic–small “d”– values.
What we’ve be seeing is a classic divide-and-conquer strategy, with the expectation that the media–hardly not-for-profit entities–will ultimately yield to intimidation and fear of being left out and marginalized. Indeed, it was disheartening when only the Associated Press and Time magazine walked out of that Sean Spicer briefing that specifically excluded the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, CNN and Politico. Breitbart News was in, but the BBC was out!
It’s also been classic scapegoating when the news isn’t laudatory or is flat-out embarrassing, which is often. Blame the messengers for their “fake news” and made-up, anonymous sources and then treat them–as Steve Bannon has characterized it–as the real opposition party.
What’s at stake is truly what’s “indispensible to democracy.” That’s how former President George W. Bush, who rarely comments publicly on anything political, has couched it. “Power can be addictive, and it can be corrosive,” said Bush, “and it’s important for the media to call to account people who abuse their power.”
We already knew Trump was addicted to the media.
It happens when you morph into a brand that is celebrated by the New York tabloids. Their charge is to favor and fawn–not critique and criticize. They were his to control. That’s not the MO of the national mainstream media, whose mandate includes holding accountable those elected to public office, including–and especially–the ultimate office. Watergate still resonates. And Richard Nixon was the quintessential control freak.
Now Trump is in the crosshairs of meaningful media. He can’t always manage simply by tweeting or heading to a Melbourne hangar for a kick-ass pep rally with the bumper sticker crowd. So he lashes out and affixes blame.
And he cites all manner of “fake news.” This from the Fabulist-in-chief, a man pathologically given to exaggerating and lying in order to deflect blame and advance his own image. From Trump University course descriptions and his “well-oiled machine” administration to all the close friends he lost on 9/11 and all the “celebrating” Muslims he observed in New Jersey as the Twin Towers were attacked.
He waxes vitriolic about anonymous sources, yet his administration still does anonymous, “background” briefings. Of course they do, because that’s White House reality, disingenuous rants notwithstanding.
Moreover, this is the same person who–without citing specific sources–promoted the Barack Obama “birther” lie. This is the same person who said during his geopolitically-suspicious campaign: “I love WikiLeaks!” And this is the same person who sourced “Jim,” his “substantial” friend, for those notorious comments about Parisian security. And, come to think of it, this is also the same person who used to regularly assume the aliases of “John Barron” and “John Miller” to spin complimentary lies about himself to the tabs.
But Trump also knows he’s not mired in a Pentagon Papers or Watergate-era media. Back then mainstream media was gospel–from the institutional New York Times and Washington Post to the TV networks and their iconic anchors. Breitbart is not Ben Bradlee. Hannity isn’t Huntley and Coulter isn’t Cronkite. Online, cable TV and talk radio cherrypicking to validate views was still a generation away.
The challenges for today’s media are beyond formidable. But they are not beyond overcoming. The media must double down on its aggressiveness, sourcing and fact-checking and not fall prey to the obvious divide-and-conquer White House gambit. But a complementary effort by the voters to be educated and motivated must also manifest itself.
A largely uninformed, lazy, easily-pandered-to electorate is ripe pickings for an authoritarian hustler. Self-congratulating, “American exceptionalism” isn’t the answer. But a renewed–Indivisible, if you will–resurgence in what makes America a truly winning democracy can make the difference. That and a sensible primary system that doesn’t encourage extremists to hijack their party.
I do agree with Nicholas Kristof of the (somehow still in business) NYT, who recently noted that “When the time comes, we will write Trump’s obituary, not the other way around.” That will happen–and it will be fitting and karmic. In the mean time, there’s a lot of push back to be done for those of us coping in the here and now.