Below is my column in the Hill on the banning of disfavored news outlets from the White House. Putting the legal challenges ahead for the Administration, it is an action that runs against the grain of our values and traditions.
Here is the column:
This week, it became apparent that everyone believes in a free press, as long as it costs them nothing.
Politicians in both parties are now using their offices to insulate themselves from opposing coverage — all in the name of protecting the public or the press.
President Trump has ordered the banning of critical media companies from the White House. Meanwhile, Democrats are fighting to block a corporate media merger on equally raw political grounds.
At the White House this week, President Trump declared, “I am proud to announce that, effective immediately, I am banning Fake News CNN, MSNOW … and Politico.” He then added that he did not understand why the courts allow the media to print “fake news,” raising the possible addition of censorship to banishment.
On Capitol Hill and across the country, Democrats were pursuing their own political litmus test for media. Twelve blue states are in court seeking to block the acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery by Paramount Skydance. While framing their claims in dubious antitrust terms, many admit that they are trying to protect one of the very companies banned by Trump as a liberal platform: CNN.
Previously, Democrats shut down the government in part over a decision to withdraw government subsidies for another liberal news outlet, National Public Radio. Years ago, some Democrats even asked cable companies to consider dropping Fox News.
Both Trump and the Democrats are oblivious to the implications of their actions, blinded by the political costs of a free press and a free market.
There is little recognition, let alone remorse, among these politicians. For Trump, many in the public rallied to his side in condemnation of media bias during the last election. I have joined in the criticism of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico for their coverage. But this ban is a frontal assault on the free press itself, shattering long-standing principles maintained by past presidents.
Presidents have long condemned the media. George Washington referred to them as those “infamous scribblers.” Thomas Jefferson complained that “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.” Yet they recognized that their oath to uphold the Constitution included a sacred duty to preserve and protect the free press.
For the Democrats, the opposition to the merger is equally transparent. Figures such as former Obama administration official Norm Eisen have opposed the Warner Bros.-Paramount merger as an attack on democracy itself. Their aim is to prevent the conservative David Ellison, chairman of Paramount Skydance, from gaining control of CNN as well as existing media assets such as CBS. Despite using antitrust law, he and others have made it plain that their aim is to preserve CNN and other outlets as liberal allies.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) declared that it is a power grab by the “oligarchs,” and that Ellison gaining control of CNN is “not acceptable. This merger must be opposed.”
Former Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer called on Democrats to stop the merger to prevent an effort to “make CNN more MAGA-friendly.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has warned that allowing the merger will “subvert CNN’s editorial independence.”
Notably, while MS NOW, CNN, and many of these individuals are condemning Trump’s announcement, they have eagerly joined the movement to block a lawful merger on political grounds. Others have pitched a deal where the merger can go through, but that they want CNN as “a strong consolation prize,” presumably to be sold to a liberal owner.
Again, there is little thought of the costs. There rarely is. When Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and others took credit for blocking the merger of Spirit Airlines with JetBlue, they declared it a victory for the Biden administration and the Democrats. Spirit Airlines then went bankrupt and all of its employees were fired.
In this case, CNN may be the Spirit Airlines of the media. It has been struggling with both revenues and ratings, despite occasional spikes. While the Democrats want to preserve the liberal platform that regularly features their interviews and narratives, CNN often operates dangerously to the baseline on the key advertising demographic needed to keep the lights on.
Warner Bros. has lost billions. The merger would be good for both companies and their employees. Under the guise of opposing a monopoly, Democrats are opposing a deal that has been cleared by the European Commission and once-skeptical experts.
I have worked for four networks as a legal analyst for 30 years, and I want CNN to flourish. We need strong media companies. That means that we need to support both the free press and the free market in maintaining journalistically and financially strong media companies. That often means setting aside our personal disagreements with coverage to oppose political manipulation of the media by either party.
I previously have written about the media and free speech in an “age of rage.” Presidents and politicians have periodically allowed their anger or interests to overwhelm their judgment. President John Adams declared, “The liberty of the press is essential to the security of the state.” Yet, his administration targeted reporters and writers under the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts.
Politicians are again using their power to manipulate the press by limiting their exposure to media criticism. They are seeking to control what the public reads and watches to protect us from “fake news” or “corporate messaging.”
For centuries, politicians have played on our anger or partisanship to target the media. To defend the free press and the free market is not to agree with these companies or their coverage. It is to defend our right to make our own decisions on what news to read and whom to believe.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Speaking of NPR losing funds, has anyone listened to that propaganda playground lately? Seems like NPR got even WORSE, most likely due to retaliation. Someone named Mary Louise Kelly should be their poster girl. I’m waiting for them to interview Charles Spencer (brother to Princess Diana) who waited until now to allege an improbable statement supposedly made by King Charles. Spencer is just like Diana: calculated timing and drawing attention to himself/herself. Spencer is the Meghan Markle of Britain, seeking attention media coverage. And boy does the media grab it!
#. Science was censored during covid. It’s a no lose to have scotus speak on free press. The lower courts may rule and it won’t get to scotus.
What’s actually needed is a population with a capacity to understand fact and opinion, reason and emotion, persuasion and advertisers, etc. Imo
“It’s the [electorate], stupid!”
– James Carville
___________________
America IS a restricted-vote republic as was Greece at the creation of democracy in 508 B.C.
One-man, one-vote mobocracy is the “dictatorship of the majority,” the “dictatorship of the poor,” the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
It is communism.
It is disaster.
^^^^ what’s muddied or unclear is “advocacy journalism” that may be a disguise and not expository or declarative reporting. It appears to an emotionally persuasive rant advertisement and not journalism as people expect. Imo
Turley: “Presidents have long condemned the media. George Washington referred to them as those “infamous scribblers.” Thomas Jefferson complained that “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.” Yet they recognized that their oath to uphold the Constitution included a sacred duty to preserve and protect the free press.”
BUt, did they believe their oath to protect and preserve a free press compelled them to allow the
” infamous scribblers” into their physical presence to question their policies, or was it only to allow them to publish whatever nonsense they wanted?
I think it was the latter. Today CNN and the rest are still free to say whatever they want.
Why do they think that have a right to limited space that is superior to other news organizations that want access?
Let him surround himself entirely with lapdog influencer dbags. Enough already. The media should grow a backbone and ignore him.
What are they going to miss exactly: he lied; golfed; slept; renamed another building or memorial or body of water, ironically after an immigrant (America); or destroyed more ecosystems for his minion swamp and the alleged jobs that will be eliminated by Ai anyway.
Let him barf-scream at his pretzel-brained Magats directly, I’m tired of his dumb face.
You are not “Everyone.” Don’t pollute this site with your dumb face.
This post and the last one PROVE we can’t trust Turley anymore. He’s gone woke on us…..
The moderators of these news organizations have blogs where comments are not wanted and thus deleted. So don’t let the door on your way out.
So what? It is reasonable for sites to exclude comments from racist, Nazi MAGA nuts. Their lies are beyond pathetic, their hate off the charts.
Sally,
They delete marshmallows and Pease on earth and good will?
“… And the beat goes on.”
What’s curious is that CNN et al., now function particularly on hate. This is new; even the Washington would be surprised. With Trump an official lame duck after the election, the big lotto contest is who will get the TDS treatment? Will it be VDS, RDS, or DDS, in honor of Vance, Rubio, or DeSantis? Hate must be laser-focused. Too broad an aperture won’t work.
There is not such thing as an “official lame duck” and Trump could still run for a third term.
A LIE AS USUAL FROM SALLY
BAN FOR LIFE!
HAHAHAHAH Turley trying to “both-sides” this so his followers won’t get big mad at him for bashing Trump for being the anti-free speech fascist that he knows he is…..Haven’t you figure it out, Professor. His rabid base will tolerate NO criticism of the Orange God-King!
While Trump is often 2 steps ahead of his critics in this case I suspect Trump is just deliberately stirring things up just before the election to put the issue of fake news front and center of voters. It’s obvious that he will lose in the courts but by then the election may be over.
The high bar set against penalizing journalists for libel was founded on an ideal that is contradicted in practice. Protection has made it possible for the 4th Estate to turn the safeguarding against “occasional factual errors” into into a lucrative business model and abandon its ethical duty to give the citizenry the accurate information required for self-government.
CNN, Newsweek, People, the Washington Times, and the Independent published their versions of the false story on Lauren Boebert.
They found a way to put lies in the public domain.
They are communist propaganda machines, in my opinion.
Banning certain press organizations from the White House triggers the political optics meter in a very bad way; however, on the other hand being allowed into the White House is a privilege not a right. I think it’s a reasonable fact that stopping an individual press organization from entering the White House doesn’t infringe on their freedom to publish whatever they want. So is the White House actually infringing on the rights of the press, I’m not so sure they are. I’m really interested in how this plays out in court, if it makes it that far.
PUPPET WATCH
Estovir is:
Witherspoon
8 Ball
Vicente
Whimsical Mama
Whig 98
Don’t Abadie
The parade below illustrates how Estovir races to add puppet comments as soon as Turley publishes new columns.
PSYCHO MORON ANON Estovir crap daily!! Get a life and a job you PSYCHO!!
Estovir, your Kirk puppet betrays you.
They’re coming to take PSYCHO MORON ANON away- hee hee ha ha ho ho! What a PSYCHO!! Loony bin for ANON!!
I want everyone to notice something really important about the comment I submitted and the reply submitted by Anonymous.
My comment was directly related to the blog essay that Mr. Turley wrote. There wasn’t anything about Mr. Turley, nothing about any other commenters, it was simply me sharing my honest opinion about the essay topic and I did it in a respectful manner that likely wouldn’t offend anyone that has a functioning adult brain. Everyone is free to agree or disagree with my opinion.
The reply to my comment submitted by Anonymous was pure ad hominem trolling. There was absolutely nothing in the reply related to the content of my comment or the content of Mr. Turley’s blog essay just a personal attack against me and six other commenters. This is exactly how morally bankrupt internet trolls intentionally disrupt. These kind of people are acting like 7th and 8th graders that haven’t matured enough to actually converse in any kind of intelligent debate.
The seven people listed in Anonymous’ reply are all living rent free in the delusional psyche of a paranoid immature moron.
ESTOVIR is Witherspoon howling with outrage because his puppets were exposed.
Screw the MSM, open up coverage to people like Nick Shirley and other podcasters, you might get more truth than fiction either way.
Turley says: “critical media companies”. CNN? Politico? For whom?
It perhaps would be safer for Trump and those doing his press conferences to simply not call on these reporters than for Trump to ban CNN, MS-NOW, and Politico reporters from the White House. Simply ignoring them would provide no basis for a First Amendment challenge but would allow their reporters and producers to continue to whine make fools of themselves.
How many legitimate news agencies are there, just within the United States, and how many precious seats are there within that press briefing room? Why should some big dogs feel that they have a righteous claim on some of those seats in perpetuity? I find nothing wrong with this move other than as a political statement of biased media. None of those banished have been censored, none are denied the ability to broadcast, none are denied the option to pursue FOIA requests from governments, none are prohibited from investigative journalism. The only thing damaged here is ego.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Free countries need a vigorous press. Trump and the GOP are making a very serious error in trying to shut out news organizations from the Whitehouse. Trump is making decisions which affect the lives of millions of people and we deserve the opportunity to hear from those who dig into that. This issue is similar to that of freedom of speech which is a crucial right which must be protected if a country is to remain free. And yes, the left wing is poisonous and voluntarily stupid, so their speech is somewhere between silly and outright vile and obnoxious and back again. But we must protect freedom and individual rights and in the case of banning news organizations from the White House, now it’s Trump (for whom I voted 3 times and for whom I would vote again against similar Democratic opponents) and the GOP who are attacking and attempting to degrade a fundamental freedom, a free press. To repeat, Trump and the GOP are absolutely wrong on this issue and we should call them on it. And if you disagree, you have to answer to the Founding Fathers who put freedom of the press into the Constitution for very good reasons.
How has he “shut out” these news entities from coverage any more than those smaller news establishments who rarelym, if ever, get a seat in that press room? This is just ego driven anger compounded with advanced TDS. There is no damage done to these 3 corporations, they are free as any other news agency that does not have access, to print, publish, investigate and obfuscate at will, where is there damage?
There has never been unbiased media (look at the 1800 election between Adams and Jefferson, for example). The problem today is the lack of alternatives. Most if not all major cities had at least 2 dailies in the 20th Century – typically one D and one R. Not any longer, due to costs/mergers/acquisitions. Where is the alternative to CNN and the legacy media?
“Where is the alternative to CNN and the legacy media?” Do you include Fox News as legacy? How do you take into account right will billionaires buying up a massive chunk of local newsroom? How many non “legacy” outfits can afford to have a reporter camp out the WH full time? Does a non-legacy news outlet need to have a pro-MAGA bent to qualify for you?
Respect you – admire even – but here you are full of it –
DA
Why ?
Trump has a better claim then democrats – but if he fixates on “why would the courts keep allowing “fake news” – then he will lose badly. Whether it is the left’s efforts to censor social media or Trump’s efforts to censor often completely bogus media criticism of him – the first amendment includes the right to say things that are wrong, or hurtful, or against your wishes.
Whether it is the democrats or republicans if the issue is censoring a viewpoint – even a viewpoint you beleive to be wrong, even a viewpoint that IS actually wrong then you run afoul of the first amendment – and rightly so.
Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill – you can not know whether you are right in your views without first hearing the best arguments of those who think you are wrong presented by those who initiated those arguments.
Supress disent and leaders nations and their people run off a cliff like lemmings.
There is a separate argument – which Trump is not making regarding the priviledge of being in the WH press corp and that is that those he is removing have ever diminishing and consequential audiences.
Being in the WH press court is a priviledge not a right. Criticising the president is a right not a priviledge.
There is limited space in the oval office, on AF1 ion the WH press room. The WH has the legitimate power to allocate that space, but it can not do so based on viewpoint.
It can do so based on audience. The legacy media is dying slowly and Trump is entitled to replace the poorest performers with new media that garner a larger audience.
But he is not able entitled to make media choices based on viewpoint.
The only claim Trump has over Ds is admittance to a geriatric psychiatric hospital?