Glenn “Instapundit” Reynolds on the relationship between Trump and the media:
First, the thing to understand is that, as I’ve said before, one of the changes going on with Trump generally is the renegotiation of various post-World War II institutional arrangements. One of those is the institutional arrangement involving the press and the White House. For decades, the press got special status because it was seen as both powerful, and institutionally responsible. (And, of course, allied with the Democrats who were mostly in charge of setting up those postwar institutional arrangements). Now those things have changed. If the press were powerful, it would have beaten Trump. If it were responsible, it wouldn’t be running away with fake news whenever it sees a chance to run something damaging to Trump. And, of course, there’s no alliance between Trump and the media, as there was with Obama.
So things will change. The press’s “insider” status — which it cherishes — is going to fade. (This is producing waves of status anxiety, as are many other Trump-induced institutional changes). And, having abandoned, quite openly, any pretense of objectivity and neutrality in the election, the press is going to be treated as an enemy by the Trump Administration until further notice.
In fact, Trump’s basically gaslighting them. Knowing how much they hate him, he’s constantly provoking them to go over the top. Sean Spicer’s crowd-size remarks are all about making them seem petty and negative. (And, possibly, teeing up crowd-size comparisons at next week’s March For Life, which the press normally ignores but which Trump will probably force them to cover).
I dispute that Obama and the press were allied. The press wimped out, as they have for the past 20 years, and deferred to whoever made the most most noise.
As for who looked petty in regards to the crowd size, Certainly a fair number of ordinary Americans may have blamed the press, but people who have a professional relationship with the federal government and vast numbers of foreigners look at Spicer and the man he represents as utter, childish amateurs. Self inflicted wound, probably the first of many.
Comment by Steve.muhlberger — January 24, 2017 @ 08:54
Even if you won’t agree that they were allies, you would have to acknowledge that Obama got far friendlier coverage than any president in living memory (including Clinton, Carter, and Johnson … I was too young to have any memories of Kennedy).
The “crowd size” argument is plain silly. It’s exactly the same “gotcha” ploy as the photos of the PM addressing the UN General Assembly compared to the US President.
Yep. Very likely so.
Comment by Nicholas — January 24, 2017 @ 10:20