American Watchdogs by Geoff arter « The Pen in Hand Blog

Attribution: The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

By Geoff Carter

The framers of the Constitution realized that a well-informed electorate was so vital to a functioning democracy, they guaranteed freedom of the press in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Our founders were determined to give the American voter the tools to understand the issues affecting their lives, an understanding provided by the working press, the watchdogs of democracy.

And these watchdogs are relentless.

Names like Ida B. Wells, who led an anti-lynching campaign; Nelly Bly, who went undercover to expose abuse in mental health institutions; Upton Sinclair, who uncovered the disgusting and unsanitary abuses of the meatpacking industry; Edward R. Murrow, who revealed McCarthyism for what it was; Walter Cronkite, the news anchor known as the most trusted man in America: Seymour Hersh, who uncovered the truth of the My Lai Massacre: Walter “Robby” Robinson, who spearheaded the investigation of the Catholic Church’s cover-up of pedophiliac priests; Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, who broke the Watergate story; Ronan Farrow, who dug up the dirt on Harvey Weinstein; and David Halberstam, whose reports from Vietnam stunned the nation, are only a few of the stalwart journalists who dedicated their lives to unearthing inconvenient truths—sometimes risking their lives to do so—and presenting them to the American public. And this tradition lives on today.

The American press has grown and evolved with the nation until it is now—in most quarters—a respected and venerated institution, but it wasn’t always that way.

In the early days of our republic, the press was often nakedly partisan toward certain political ideologies, but early in the 20^th century, journalism underwent a shift from partisan reporting to professional objectivism. The use of wire services, and formalization of these standards led to “realism”, “the idea that if reporters simply dug out the facts and ordered them together, truth would reveal itself rather naturally.” Wildly biased or slanted newspapers—“yellow journalism”—were eventually superseded by modern journalism.

In 1949, with the advent of television broadcasting, the Fairness Doctrine was established for two purposes: to require broadcast networks to devote airtime to issues affecting the public, and to provide contrasting viewpoints on those issues. And, of course, this was intended to help create a well-informed electorate, which it largely accomplished.

Then, in 1987, the Reagan administration’s repeal of the Fairness Doctrine gave rise to partisan networks like Fox, OAN, MS Now, and others, which—some have argued—has given rise to political polarization in this country. The rise of social media, a news platform with no restrictions and few boundaries—has turned the dissemination of news into a three-ring-circus, what one might term—a la Shakespeare’s MacBeth:

“A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Yet today’s mainstream press is still fighting the good battle and is up against one of the corrupt, ignorant, mendacious, and avaricious men to ever step foot in the Oval Office. And Donald Trump is using every tool at his disposal to hamstring the free press—but this is nothing new.

The American press has a long and storied, and sometimes antagonistic, relationship with its presidents. In 1798, the Alien and Sedition Acts were enacted by the Federalist administration of John Adams to suppress the editors and publishers who aligned with the Democratic-Republicans criticizing the Federalist Administration. It was widely seen as a blatant violation of First Amendment rights and was the first of a long string of attempts by sitting presidents to muzzle the press.

While Thomas Jefferson championed the idea of a free press, he complained about the partisan nature of newspapers, especially when they leveled their sights on him. At one point, he stated, “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle” (The History Channel).

Andrew Jackson also had an interesting relationship with the press, cultivating his relationship with Francis Blair, the editor of the Boston Globe, to slant news stories in his favor in exchange for patronage and insider news.

Abraham Lincoln also had to deal with an aggressive and antagonistic press that was sometimes very insulting, calling him “Honest Ape” and an “imbecile”. While Lincoln ignored the personal attacks, he did take measures against the press when he felt it jeopardized national security during the Civil War. According to The Free Speech Center, Union generals prevented “newspapers from publishing battle plans and to keep Confederate sympathizers from aiding the enemy”.

Dealing with papers that encouraged readers to sympathize with the enemy or to end the war was a unique problem for President Lincoln. Were the news editors exercising their right to free speech or were they traitorous to the Union cause? Lincoln justified these actions as necessary exercises of his war powers.

Teddy Roosevelt used the press to his advantage, staging publicity stunts, press conferences, and hiring press agents. After Upton Sinclair’s publication of The Jungle, his stunning expose of the illegal and filthy conditions inside the meat packing industry, Roosevelt initiated a press campaign to pass his Pure Food and Drug Bill through Congress, also coining the term “muckraker”.

Which brings us to Richard Nixos who had—up until now—the most contentious presidential relationship with the press. It started with his opposition to the Washington Post’s publication of The Pentagon Papers, which the Supreme Court ultimately ruled was a lawful exercise of freedom of the press. Then, several years later, the Post broke the Watergate story, and in its follow-up investigative reporting by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein exposed the extent of the conspiracy that reached all the way to Nixon’s Oval Office and resulted in his resignation.

If possible, President Trump hates the press more than Nixon did. He has not only displayed open and contemptuous hostility toward the mainstream media, which he has ridiculously called “fake news”, but has grown more acerbic and aggressive over time, characterizing “the liberal mainstream media” as an enemy of the people.

Yet the men and women of the press have remained undaunted, reporting courageously on the Epstein file cover-up, Trump’s cryptocurrency scams, his cozy relationship with Putin, Netanyahu, and other autocrats, the January 6^thattempted coup, DOGE’s destructive raids, the demolition of the East Wing, Secretary of Defense Hegseth’s fudging of the Iran War casualty numbers, Trump’s idiotic tariffs, ICE attacks and murders in Minneapolis, Chicago, and elsewhere, the Qatar luxury airliner gift, and Trump’s efforts to discredit our electoral process are only the tip of the iceberg.

The free press is the reason we know exactly what the Trump administration has been up to. The corruption, the crimes to humanity, the cruelty, and the rapidly escalating mental decline of our president—the man with the nuclear codes—have been meticulously documented, edited, and reported to us, the American people.

It’s no surprise that this administration has issues with the press. Historically, this is hardly news. What is surprising is the nature of this president’s animosity. He not only rails at press coverage of policy but disputes the facts themselves. He still insists he won the 2020 election and that his 2017 inauguration had more people than Obama’s—despite irrefutable facts.

He has also vigourously attempted to muzzle the press and direct their coverage. He has (illegally) prohibited certain reporters from the White House press pool, insulted and denigrated them, and in some cases, threatened them. He has thrown individual reporters he doesn’t like out of press briefings, specifically reporters who call out his lies.

Over the course of his first term, fact-checkers at the Washington Post recorded no less than 30,000 false or misleading statements from Trump. This president’s complicated relationship to the truth and facts is difficult enough for journalists to cover, but the sheer volume of his mendacity, criminal acts, and corruption makes it extremely tough for the press to inform the people what is happening to their government. Yet, they persist, and the fact that they do—and have throughout the course of American history—is what has preserved this democracy.

We not only would be lost without them. We wouldn’t know what we’d been missing.