- White
House launches website section targeting media. - Lists
journalists and outlets accused of distortion. - Aims
to expose biased or false coverage.
“Misleading. Biased. Exposed” is written at the
top of the page. The Boston Globe, CBS News, and the Independent are named as
“media offenders of the week” in the article, which accuses them of
misrepresenting Trump’s comments regarding six Democratic senators who issued a
video urging military personnel to defy unlawful orders.
Trump’s social media accusations of Democrats engaging in
“seditious behavior, punishable by death” sparked the debate.
Additionally, he retweeted a remark that said, “hang them.”
According to the site,
“The Democrats and Fake News Media
subversively implied that President Trump had issued illegal orders to service
members. Every order President Trump has issued has been lawful.
It is
dangerous for sitting Members of Congress to incite insubordination in the
United States’ military, and President Trump called for them to be held
accountable.”
A “Offender Hall of Shame” featuring the
Washington Post, CBS News, CNN, and MSNBC (formerly known as MS formerly) is
another component of the website. A searchable database of articles and the
names of the journalists who authored them is available to visitors. Labels
like “bias,” “malpractice,” or “left wing lunacy”
are applied to each article.
According to a scoreboard, the Washington Post is presently
the biggest offender, followed by MSNBC and CBS News.
The US Coast Guard will no longer designate swastikas and
nooses as hate symbols, according to a Washington Post piece from earlier this
month. However, the Coast Guard changed its mind after the article was
published.
The White House page accuses a wide range of media outlets
of bias or disinformation, including the Associated Press, the New York Times,
the Wall Street Journal, Politico, and Axios, in addition to those designated
as weekly offenders.
The webpage’s introduction is the most recent
intensification of Trump’s ongoing criticism of the media. It comes after he
repeatedly referred to major news organizations as the “enemy of the
people,” filed lawsuits against the Wall Street Journal and the New York
Times, and reached settlements with ABC and CBS.
Additionally, Trump has escalated his personal attacks on
female journalists in recent weeks. He called a Bloomberg News correspondent a
“piggy” earlier this month.
Are there legal or ethical concerns about a government media
blacklist?
A government- maintained media blacklist like the White
House’s” Media Offender of the Week” raises First Amendment issues in
the U.S., as public review of outlets could chill defended speech if perceived
as retribution or previous restraint, though pure opinion or factual
disconfirmations on government websites generally repel scrutiny under cases
like Miami Herald v. Tornillo( 1974).
Courts have ruled blocking critics on sanctioned social
media violates free speech( Knight First Amendment Inst. v. Trump, 2019), but
static websites listing contended deformations face lower bars absent access
denial or compulsion.
No direct precedent exists for such a” hall of
shame,” but escalation to warrants or access restrictions could invite
suits from outlets like CBS or CNN.
