On November 7th, 2018, President Trump held a press conference that had a very testy exchange with CNN reporter Jim Acosta. Acosta “challenged” him on Trump’s opinion of immigrants calling it a “caravan”, when in fact, it wasn’t a caravan. During the exchange, Trump replied sarcastically, thanking him for telling him what a caravan was. After Acosta’s disagreement with Trump, Acosta refused to back down from the president, prompting an intern to come over and wrestle the microphone free from Acosta. Acosta tried to ask his follow up question, but was denied. Trump, visibly frustrated, moved on to another reporter. When Acosta kept persisting, Trump interrupted the reporter’s question.“I’ll tell you what, CNN should be ashamed of itself having you work for them. You are a rude terrible person, you shouldn’t be working for CNN,” said Trump.
“In Jim’s defense, I’ve traveled with him and watched him. He’s a diligent reporter who busts his butt like the rest of us,” said Peter Alexander, Chief White House Correspondent for NBC. “I’m not too fond of you either,” said Trump. Two days later, the White House revoked Acosta’s press pass. “President Trump believes in a free press and expects and welcomes tough questions of him and his Administration. We will, however, never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern[...]As a result of today’s incident, the White House is suspending the hard pass of the reporter involved until further notice,” said former Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. After that incident, Sanders retweeted an edited video from the official White House press secretary account that showed Acosta touching the female intern, editing out Acosta’s “Pardon me, ma’am” from the video.
The Washington Post played the two videos side by side and slowed down the speeds at different intervals to show the clear manipulation of the edited video. The original video shows Acosta trying to retain control of the microphone after the intern tries to grab it from him. The edited video paints a different picture. Acosta is seen “chopping” the girl’s arm away after she tried to grab the microphone from him. Two weeks after that incident, the White House gave Acosta back his press pass. “Should you refuse to follow these rules in the future, we will take action,” said the White House Administration.
Shortly after that statement was released, The White House implemented a strict code of conduct for the reporters to follow into the future. According to the Washington Post, The White House Correspondents’ Association was not happy with the statement from The White House. Recently, President Trump and his administration have made a habit of excluding CNN and other media organizations that aren’t fond of him from luncheons and press events.
This is a serious issue at hand. Our first amendment right gives us certain protections and abilities, such as the freedom of the press. Hopefully, this doesn’t change the landscape of the First Amendment for future media organizations that oppose the president. What I mean by that is if there is another president who has similar ideologies of President Trump, what is going to stop them from restricting a news organization or an individual from asking them questions just because they don’t like the outcome? This will probably change the entire landscape of the media and how the media approaches asking tough questions in the future.
President Trump should not have revoked the press pass of Jim Acosta just because he asked him a challenging question or has covered him negatively in the past. The point of being a journalist is to cover the facts and ask questions. It is ironic that President Trump calls CNN “fake news”, but has an administration that continues to propagate false information (ex.- the Acosta video) not the facts mind you, to help boost his credibility.
Additionally, it’s important for people to receive the news no matter how they lean, because the news is the news. In addition, past presidents wouldn’t have done this to opposing media. As mentioned in the assignment sheet itself, this is not normal behavior for the United States to restrict media access based on their network’s affiliation. The resolution was appropriate, but Acosta's press pass should have never been taken away in the first place. It is understood that the question may not have been fair, but you can’t take away someone who challenges you. An example would be a baseball player ignoring his coach and teammates when they are telling you that you aren’t playing well or asking you a tough question.
Especially in Trump’s role, it’s important to be a leader and face the music of someone criticizing you. In conclusion, Acosta’s interaction with Trump will be a monumental moment in the relationship between journalism and the presidency. If we don’t continue to support the first amendment rights of journalists and the media, our country’s ethical standards with the media will be tracking towards restrictive countries, such as Saudi Arabia’s treatment and eventual execution of Washington Post journalist, Jamal Khashoggi. We need to do better.
-While I understand you're trying to give all the facts, the first paragraph could be diluted a bit more to explain the situation to a lay reader. You can do this by placing the quotes after explaining the incident.
ReplyDelete- Never begin a paragraph with 'especially' or 'additionally'.
- Your ending and the comparison to Saudi is good. But, the last sentence can be stronger than 'We can do better'.