Matthew T. Lee is a lifelong Iowa resident and University of Dubuque graduate who follows local and national politics.

The American media encountered a strange new challenge in the summer of 2015: how to keep up with and hold accountable a public figure who lies at a breathtaking rate? How to fact check, how to cover, how to pierce through the disinformation? 

Most political reporters never figured that out. As time went on, their problem was compounded. That disingenuous public figure took over one of the two major U.S. political parties and became president—and he did so on the back of discrediting the the “fake news media.”

Fast forward to 2024. This man is once again running for president. The political party he usurped is even more under his sway (his daughter-in-law now co-chairs the Republican National Committee). And the media has apparently learned nothing in the ensuing nine years.

It’s not that there aren’t any capable reporters or news organizations, but when the body as a whole remains incapable, each individual component has less and less influence. The media is a large entity, and it’s become far easier to duck interviewers who do their job. (Do you really think Donald Trump will ever sit down with Jonathan Swan again?) There are so many other interviewers chasing clicks and clout, more than willing to toss softball after softball. That gives the bully more and more power to control the narrative and leaves better reporters in the dust. 

Take the disparity between the mainstream media coverage of the (obvious) aging of President Joe Biden and former President Trump. After Biden’s disastrous debate performance (and to be honest, well before then), the media as a whole relentlessly hounded the president, asking him over and over again if he was going to step down, if his age had become a detriment, often screaming over each other while doing so. 

Compare that behavior to the softball questions, which reporters asked Trump politely (not shouting) during his bizarre and rambling August 8 press conference at Mar-A-Lago. Did anyone ask about his aging and inability to logically complete a thought? Of course not. Did anyone press him about his non-answers to policy questions? Nope.

In fact, Trump deems the simple act of reading hiw own statements back to him as hostile. ABC’s Rachel Scott learned that during Trump’s belligerent recent appearance at the National Association of Black Journalists conference.

Some members of the media have noticed this blatant double standard, however.

Lawrence O’Donnell, the longtime host of “The Last Word” on MSNBC, opened his August 8 show by lambasting not only the media at large, but his own network as well. “It would be hard to find a sentence in what Donald Trump said today that did not include at least one lie,” O’Donnell barked. “Some of the networks tried to play catch-up with fact-checking after Donald Trump finished speaking but, that of course, is way too late and utterly useless. No network even attempted to check every lie Donald Trump told.” 

O’Donnell went on to criticize the reporters’ questions and their failure to follow up or push back. He even criticized his own network for doing much of the same; airing the entirety of Trump’s lie-filled press conference, while failing to air Vice President Kamala Harris’ speech to the United Auto Workers. 

Viewing O’Donnell live that night, it was easy to see he had been chomping at the bit since Trump’s “press conference” ended, slowly burning and building up fumes during the six to seven hour wait before his own show began. It’s hard to blame him. Many of us share his feeling that the media have collectively been failing us since 2015, when a reality TV host first descended his golden escalator to announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination.

From that day forward, many news organizations have sputtered in keeping up with the daily dose of BS from Trump and his movement. MAGA world has also relentlessly attacked and tried to discredit the media, and this constant disparagement has led some journalists to over-correct in an attempt to seem “impartial.” 

That’s understandable. It’s a natural human reaction to adapt one’s own behavior under relentless hounding. But this over-correction has caused lasting and profound harm to our institutions and information structure. Lies have become normalized, and those who attack our democratic norms are covered in the same way as those who respect them.

This asymmetry only enhances the public’s distrust, it doesn’t rectify it. Efforts to be impartial have instead made journalists partial. By treating a democratically subversive former president like any other generic candidate, reporters harm the very institution they profess to protect.

Even worse, not only do the mainstream media largely treat Trump like a normal candidate, they actually give him special treatment, as a candidate they don’t want to fall out with. 

Do you think any reporter will ask him about his obvious slurring and strange speech patterns during his confusing conversation with Elon Musk on X (formerly Twitter)? I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Instead, they will most likely report what Trump says with kid gloves, then turn around and ask Vice President Harris what she thinks about what her opponent said. That is not news. That’s tabloid journalism. 

So why do they do it? Is it chasing those all so valuable clicks? Is it simply that Trump is good for business? Is it a fear of a loss of access, due to all of the above?

Whatever produces the shortcomings, we can rest assured that most political reporters will not effectively cover this man as long as he’s on the national stage. Just like we cannot rely on the courts to save us, neither can we rely on the news media. We need to save ourselves at the voting booth. And then, one hopes, the media will be able to return to doing its job.

---

Top photo: President Donald Trump gestures as he addresses reporters questions at a press conference in the Rose Garden of the White House with Polish President Duda. Photo by Evan El-Amin, available via Shutterstock.