Opinion | Trump’s decision to handpick reporters sets a dangerous precedent
Photo Collage by Emily Paris, Photo Editor
Breaking a decades-long tradition of unbiased federal government coverage, President Donald Trump has announced that his administration will be handpicking which journalists get to ask him questions in the most crucial press rooms.
When a president holds events on a smaller or more casual level — in the Oval Office, for example — they enlist the presence of a selected group of reporters, known as the press pool. This group has historically been appointed by the White House Correspondents’ Association, rotating in and out of the pool based on the association’s choosing, and has included various types of outlets to avoid potential bias.
Now, Trump and his administration will be able to cherry-pick who gets to be in the room where it happens. Regardless of the politician or their political party, this is a ridiculous and dangerous precedent for any person in power to make.
As a journalism student and an aspiring reporter, this news gave me chills. A journalist’s job is to have access to the inner workings of a system and to share that information with the people who are affected by that system.
George Orwell summed it up nicely: “Journalism is printing something that someone does not want to be printed. Everything else is public relations.”
The president is, in short, censoring the postage of any media that disagrees with him or paints him in a way that doesn’t please him. He’s already moved on this action, going to the lengths of barring reporters of certain organizations from attending his events and pausing communication from federal agencies.
Trump is trying to kill journalism and replace it with his own personal hype squad.
This terrifies me for many reasons; I'm cautious about consuming media that comes solely from Trump’s favorite newsrooms. I’m scared for the next four years and the imperative behind-the-scenes action that we might miss. Most of all, I’m worried about the lasting implications.
The smaller meetings and conferences are places where Trump’s true colors can show, and where he can make decisions that affect millions of citizens. Now, anyone who questions or disagrees with the administration can be kicked out, like the Associated Press was when they refused to change the stylization of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
The White House has already enlisted some of Trump’s trusted confidantes, like podcast host Sage Steele and the Right Side Broadcasting Network’s Brian Glenn. I have this funny — but also frightening — feeling that the most they’ll ask the president is, “What’s your favorite color?”
Another fear of mine: if the president of the United States says no to an interview, it sets the expectation that anyone can do the same. It takes away credibility from reporters and the art of journalism.
We’ve seen what happens to countries with restricted media (not that we can really see anything, because it’s on lock). It can feel drastic to make comparisons between our country and those with media blockage and control, but this step is a smaller-scaled version of what could be. Censorship isn’t just unlawful, it’s dangerous.
Meanwhile, America has been advertised as a “government of the people, by the people, for the people,” since Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. We’re a country that values freedom of the press in the First Amendment of our Constitution.
A government that is truly for the people would not limit the news organizations that are allowed to participate in press pools. This is an administration that is hiding secrets in the shadows, locking its own people out from the place where important decisions are made.
It has nothing to do with who the president is, in my eyes. Trump or no Trump, this is absurd. No matter what you believe about abortion, immigration or gun laws, believe this: our country and our government have taken a massive step backward, and we have every right to be concerned.
