Preparing to write my last column for this publication has provoked an introspective reflection on how journalism — and my own interest in United States politics — have evolved, especially in the context of the Trump administration’s first 100 days.
It’s safe to say that President Donald Trump has never had a friendly relationship with the media — his coined term “Fake News” speaks for itself.
However, it’s one thing for the president to gripe on social media and another to take actual administrative action on this particular dislike of his. To aid him with this specific problem, Trump looked no further than tapping newly appointed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, who has drastically remodeled the White House press corps and kept it relatively under wraps.
For example, it may be a simple task to focus on the flashy headlines — looking at you, tariffs — but sometimes, the most impactful administrative moves happen quietly without much media coverage.
Ironically, what is getting less attention is the manipulated media coverage of the Trump administration.
Get The Daily Illini in your inbox!
In a viral moment, and on the heels of the highly contentious meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the latter was asked by a reporter in the president’s inner circle of Oval Office reporters why he doesn’t wear a suit, echoing Trump’s concern that it was disrespectful.
The reporter was Brian Glenn, chief White House correspondent for Real America’s Voice, a far-right television channel known to corroborate conspiracy theories. As a New York Times article pointed out, Glenn’s outlet had been hand-selected to be in that Oval Office press pool, a highly coveted spot, in a position that hadn’t even existed before that week.
This invitation-based press coverage, spearheaded by Leavitt, is particularly evident in the White House briefing room. During previous administrations, reporters filled the many seats in the room. However, the Trump administration and Leavitt have overhauled the space and added many reporters along the sides of the briefing room that weren’t in that space before, in addition to the traditional outlets with designated seats.
As a New York Times video noted, Leavitt takes about a quarter of her questions in every briefing from those reporters, whom she refers to as “new media.”
The same video further showed what some of those reporters have been asking, with them mentioning in their questions that “(the President) looks healthier than ever before” or “want(ing) to talk about the success that ICE is having.”
As if the overhaul in that sense wasn’t enough for Leavitt’s team, in the last week, Leavitt has begun to lead specific briefings for those same “new media” members, who appear to be conservative online personalities.
One reporter prefaced her question by thanking the Trump administration because her “Uber drivers finally speak English again,” and another remarked on the president’s “historically high approval ratings,” which are, in fact, historically low.
The long-term impact these actions have is why this is such a big deal. In a political climate that has supplied a record-low trust level in national news networks, especially among Republicans, reinforcing the mammoth walls of these echo chambers is a dangerous act.
While addressing the issue of low trust in traditional news is important, an approach that doesn’t alienate and further polarize voters is critical. Expanding media voices is a worthy goal and long overdue, but using that as a cover by pretending that only far-right and conservative voices represent that diversity undermines any actual progress.
The press isn’t perfect, but it is essential. When a government begins to curate the facts surrounding it and its coverage, we lose the shared facts that research has proved democracy depends on. The moment we allow power to decide what is worth questioning — and who is allowed to ask about it — we lose the point of asking at all.
This, to me, is one of the most consequential developments of Trump’s second presidency and will sow even more distrust in the media at a time when that is the last thing we need.
As I close this chapter of my life and prepare to head to our nation’s capital in just shy of a year to experience this phenomenon directly, I don’t pretend to have all the answers. But I do know that journalism isn’t about affirmation; it’s about accountability. The job isn’t to cheerlead or to tear down but to illuminate and serve those who can’t ask the questions themselves.
George is a senior in LAS.
