The spectacle of the media being attacked at a Trump rally was not the shock it might have been somewhere else. BBC North America editor Jon Sopel lays it out:
...I covered endless Trump rallies in the run-up to the election and since - and there is a pattern. The attacks on the media are hugely popular with his supporters. They are every bit as much a part of his "set" as Honky Tonk Woman and Satisfaction are part of a Rolling Stones concert. You just can't imagine it not happening.
...At some point in the president's remarks he will point a finger to where we are filming and you know then the fun is about to begin. "Have you seen a group of more dishonest people? They are fake news; they are the enemies of the people."
And like at a Christmas pantomime the crowd would jeer and boo. Honestly, for the overwhelming majority it is good fun; a part of the ritual. Like being at a football match and saying disobliging things about the referee.
But for a few - and I should add, a growing few, it is more than that. The uncomfortable truth is that with each month that passes the attacks have become more vociferous, the violent atmosphere on these occasions more palpable.
Read the whole thing. Sopel links to the NY Times article where Trump was specifically questioned about his anti-press rhetoric. Reading the Times article is surreal. Deciphering Trump is hard enough, but one passage stood out for me.
...Let me [Trump] finish by saying this, what you do is a very important thing. And I will tell you, I would love if I was just covered fairly. If I were covered fairly — like this should be a fair story. I don’t know what the story is, this should be a fair story. I actually think your readers would respect it. Because I know what you’re all saying, but everybody thinks The New York Times treats me terribly. Washington Post also, but The New York Times even more so treats me unbelievably terribly. And I think, I honestly believe you lose credibility by that. I don’t think I’ve had a good story in The New York Times and let me tell you —
SULZBERGER: Can I just say one thing on that?
TRUMP: — but I became president and I didn’t have a good story. Go ahead.
SULZBERGER: You may enjoy knowing that Hillary Clinton says the exact same thing about us.
Okay, it’s clear that Trump is telling Sulzberger “You’re not being fair to me. Be nice to me and I’ll be nice to you.” He’s taking issue with what he sees as bad treatment by the Times because they’re not kissing his butt. Standard Trump in other words. Rambling, only vaguely in touch with reality, ego on full display, spouting lies. misstatements, and alternative ‘facts’.
But Sulzberger’s response is also mind-boggling. He’s saying in effect “Hillary Clinton thinks we treated her unfairly too, so that shows we’re just doing our job.”
If that isn’t a clear demonstration of one-hand other-hand false equivalence, it comes pretty close.
It’s part of what put Trump into the White House and keeps him there, the refusal by the Times to acknowledge that treating Clinton and Trump as two sides of the same coin was and is journalistic malpractice. Journalists might not be getting roughed up today if there hadn’t been so much effort to treat Trump as ‘normal’, out of fear of looking partisan.
Questions about Trump’s mental state, his history of bad behavior in his business dealings, his marital history, his blatant racism, his troubling associates — we’re seeing so much about all that now, but it wasn’t secret in 2016 or even earlier. Instead the Clinton rules were in full effect — and besides — Trump was getting them eyeballs. Plus, Republicans and conservative media for years have made a science of manipulating the press with intimidation, nothing burgers and fake scandals about Democrats — and the willing cooperation of the MSM to pick it up and run with it.
(And IOKIYAR. Always IOKIYAR.)
But here we are today. Sopel closes with this:
None of us goes into journalism expecting a grateful public to be throwing rose petals in our path as we walk along, or carrying us aloft as conquering heroes.
But in a healthy democracy surely we ought to be able to report a president's speech without - literally - having to look over our shoulder.
In a healthy democracy someone like Trump wouldn't be allowed anywhere near power. In a healthy democracy, the press would have made everyone aware why someone like Trump shouldn’t be allowed near power. Is it any wonder social media has replaced traditional media as a news source for so many? For some, it’s a question of hearing what they want to hear, for others because they’re not getting what they need to hear from traditional media.
We’re all looking over our shoulders these days, those of us not wearing MAGA hats. The White House has issued a pro forma condemnation of the attack — but there are no signs Trump will abandon his attacks on the media any time soon, or that the media has recognized where it got it wrong and is still falling down. The odds are that things will only get worse in the days ahead as Democratic investigations in the House proceed, Mueller gets close to issuing his report, and Donald Trump responds to it all by doubling down on his attacks and bad behavior.
At some point the media will either have to stop equivocating, or risk collapsing completely into irrelevance.
Interesting times ahead.