[ad_1]
DEBATE. Some media in the United States have become as polarized as the first presidential debate. Commentators have taken the line that it is a war that will end without Trump being re-elected. The media and Trump himself love Trump’s tweets, but that is not the whole picture that the media should analyze, writes US expert Janerik Larsson.
Can You Trust Major American Media Coverage Of President Donald Trump?
The simple answer to that question is no, but with the reservation that, as always, when it comes to American conditions, there are no simple, uncomplicated answers. For example, anyone who reads the New York Post can read almost every day about what a fantastic president the country has and how disturbing it would be in various respects if Joe Biden were elected president.
Some media have chosen to be as polarized as the first debate between the two presidential candidates. This applies, for example, to CNN, whose coverage after the first debate was scary or ridiculous, depending on your mood.
It was as I imagine Chinese or Soviet propaganda television. Every voice that was heard spoke of how lousy Trump was and how successful Biden’s effort was.
The paradox is that President Trump himself is actively contributing to the negative image of his efforts.
For four years now, the Wall Street Journal has noted on its editorial page, on the one hand, what has been said to have been in many very sensible efforts by the Trump administration, but on the other hand it warned the president of the effect negative of his rhetoric, his tweets and his many false. claim (es.
The Wall Street Journal has consistently criticized the Trump administration for its protectionist and isolationist trade policy. That concern also applies to what to expect on those issues under Biden’s presidency. Unfortunately, a sharp reversal of course is unlikely in these respects.
The fact that CNN was sparked by Trump’s numerous attacks on the channel has meant that CNN most of the time since January 20, 2017 has been as unilaterally anti-Trump as MSNBC, which of course had the ambition to be the one. counterweight from Fox News.
What’s most interesting about Fox News is that its coverage has gradually become more nuanced, prompting lines of tough outbursts against the channel in Donald Trump’s tweets.
Casey B. Mulligan, an economics professor at the University of Chicago, recently published a book on Trump in the White House. Mulligan is a distinctly conservative economist who for a period in the Trump years served as chief economist on the White House Council of Economic Advisers. In “You’re Hired !: Unpublished Successes and Failures of a Populist President,” he offers a picture of work in the White House that is not much different from other presidential administrations. Is right? Well, it’s Mulligan’s perspective that makes you accept it.
It is also a defense speech for Trump and no matter what you think about it, you can claim that that perspective is not appreciated in the American media today because it has too many nuances.
In the Swedish media, one can probably criticize oneself after Trump, be it in January 2021 or January 2025, wondering if the main task of the media is to give its audiences different angles or if the task is to carry out a war. politics.
It is easy to understand that Trump is provoking and more and more American commentators have spoken very clearly along the lines that this is now a war that will end without Trump being re-elected.
CNN reaches many Swedish televisions, including through Expressen TV, but the media looking to complicate a very simple picture of Trump’s years in the White House, which means that it is about more than he writes on Twitter, weird once they do. The outbursts and slander that Trump’s tweets spread are loved by the media and by Trump himself, but the question is whether it is the big picture that the media should examine.
An example of this is the British historian Niall Ferguson, who wrote in an interesting way about the culture war going on in the United States. He has pointed out the possibility that the swamp that the pandemic represents for the president will not catch him in the elections. The violent riots during the summer may have left deeper traces than those now seen in opinion polls.
The interesting and important thing is to realize that there are other perspectives, that it is not about overthrowing a dictator but that it is actually about democratic elections.
Is it then the task of the media to provide facts? This is the central question to which a significant portion of the American media is now answering no.
Jay Rosen, a journalism professor at New York University, has claimed that Donald Trump’s unspoken promise to his electorate is that he will suppress the elite media.
If Trump is re-elected in a month, it is likely mainly due to economic development before the pandemic and the promise that something similar will return after the pandemic. The culture war is perhaps a contributing factor, even if Trump’s temper caused the elite media to lose its grip.
The new media reality has contributed to what we see today. Increasingly, American political culture is governed by the logic of television entertainment, and that is unlikely to change if Trump disappears.
Trump’s aggressive language also scares those who are primarily on the conservative side of American politics.
Trump recently responded that he could not guarantee that he would accept a peaceful power shift if he lost. John Podhoretz wrote an outrageous column in the New York Post wondering what the president meant.
Or he has no idea what he is doing and responds without thinking about the consequences. Or he is preparing a coup to destroy American democracy in order to remain in the White House. Podhoretz also pointed to another interpretation: intimidating voters into voting for him so that the alternative does not become relevant.
This is American politics as a game in and for the media. But is it the job of the media to get involved in the game? Confidence in the American media has deteriorated under Trump, and it’s hard to interpret that as just the president’s fault.
If you look at the American presidential elections from the perspective of the Swedish media, the question should be the same as it should be there: what is the task of the media: combat agencies or truth seekers?
Janerik Larsson, Advisor to the Free Business Foundation
