I have walked under this arch more times than I can count. The words engraved on it are a derivation from the third verse of the 12th chapter of the Old Testament book of Daniel. It’s the University of Missouri School of Journalism arch connecting the two buildings that have been the heart of the school for decades, the places where I learned the responsibilities of being a journalist.
William F. Woo, the then-editor of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, wrote in 1996 that Walter Williams, the founder of the nation’s oldest journalism school, and Joseph Pulitzer, who joined two 19th century St. Louis newspapers together were partners in stating the journalism ideal.
Williams wrote The Journalist’s Creed that begins, “I believe in the profession of journalism. I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust…I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.”
Pulitzer’s platform, still published every day in his newspaper, says: “Never tolerate injustice or corruption; always fight demagogues of all parties; never belong to any party; always oppose privileged classes and public plunderers; never lack sympathy with the poor; always remain devoted to the public welfare: never be satisfied with merely printing news; always be drastically independent; never be afraid to attack wrong whether by predatory plutocracy or predatory poverty.”
It is not easy to live those noble words. Many professions have statements of standards and it’s no easier for practitioners of those professions to live up to those highest standards either. As Woo said, the challenge is “how to successfully work through the matters of our day that are pressing but in fact peripheral and concentrate, with clarity and determination, on the great public purpose that endures.”
Sometimes it’s hard to see those noble words in practice when they bring reporters into angry confrontations with their subjects. In our experience, the worst confrontations have been caused by a search for the truth from someone who is less than zealous about telling it or having it revealed.
Tolerating President Trump from this distance is relatively easy when compared with those who have to put up with him every day, especially when he spends so much time insulting reporters and news organizations that challenge him when he lies—which seems to be most of the time—or shows no interest in telling the truth.
Thus we have his banning of reporters from three organizations from the White House. Not just the White House but from the press area set aside on the west wing lawn. Reporters for CNN, MS NOW, and Politico—a Capitol Hill political news organization—learned Saturday morning when checking through the security gate that Trump had cancelled their credentials.
We watched some of them report on the street side of the fence.
He also has hinted these three might not be the last news organizations banned from the White House, the press room, and the yard.
There’s a simple way to end what he thinks is constant hostile reporting.
He can quit constantly lying.
Washington Post fact checkers caught him in 30,573 lies in his first term. We haven’t been able to find a running total for the second term but the independent The Cap Times, the Madison, Wisconsin version of our Missouri Independent, reported a week after his second inaugural, “Trump’s Lie Meter Runing Full Time.”
Comedian and social commentator John Stewart has suggested Trump might be doing an injustice to himself. Huff Post quotes him saying, “I actually think he needs them more than they need him.” He says the media might want to think about ignoring him instead of reporting everything he does or says. Press conferences, he says, are “designed for his personal performance” that “serves no purpose in terms of public value. It’s just another platform for him to spew.” A press pool that ignores him, he says, “would deny him the thing that he craves the most,” being the center of attention.
He has a point. But it isn’t realistic. Donald Trump is the crash scene you have to look at as you slowly drive by, muttering about how slow the traffic is ahead of you because others are doing the same thing.
Unfortunately for Trump, it is journalistically impossible to ignore his rolling wreck. There is an obligation to report on his tantrums, his prevarications, his lack of decency, his bullying, his complete lack of responsibility for what he is doing and has done to individuals, the nation, and the world..
“I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible,” said Williams 118 years ago.
The welfare of society is at risk when there is no one to hold someone like Donald Trump accountable. And being held accountable is something he can’t tolerate which is why he bans reporters from Air Force One and from the White House and why he rants about news organizations and specific news reporters.
Banning some reporters never works. Colleagues ask their questions for them. Colleagues demand their answers. He can roar all that he wants. He will never escape the scrutiny of the press. He can have his favorite network lap dogs but they won’t keep the public from knowing more of the truth than he would ever tell.
After announcing the ban on the three news agencies, Trump said he was tired of all of the negative reporting correspondents had been doing about him. “They’re fake news,” he said. “You get so tired of reading and seeing fake news. You get sick of it.”
There’s an old saying that politicians should not get into a war of words with people who buy ink by the barrel. He can throw out reporters but he can’t hide from the news.
Donald Trump IS the fake news and the polls indicate a lot of people are “sick of it.” Journalists are just exposing him to the public as he is. The public is seeing the light. And an increased percentage of the public also is “sick of it.”
Banning reporters is an act of cowardice by a man who resents the fact that the image he creates for himself is being truthfully reported.
One way or another, he—not the press—will be the loser.
Photo Credit: (Sheila Scarborough)