Really good post, Mike! I'm not sure Journalists will be drawn to read this from the title, which is disappointing, because you have something sooo important to say in the article. Especially your last couple of paragraphs as to 'all you need to do..' I read that and it spoke a marketing message to Journalists loudly: 'A secret to delivering break-news that's unique, engaging, and edgy to set yourself apart: Add a Constitutionally aligned word/ special phrase/ sentence that will additionally be noted as your being on the right side of history at a pivotal point for USA. Your grandchildren will likely ask "did you write to save ... (truth, Constitution, Democracy)? If it's no... why you didn't write the Truth that could have saved Democracy for me... ' Kids don't lie or play games like 'Adults'.
Thanks for your really thoughtful post. You hit on a pet peeve of mine (hence my rant...)
JoAn - as a former professional journalist I can tell you why journalists will brush it off. Mike makes some very good points, but he doesn’t know anymore about how professional journalism actually works than Trump knows how government works.
And they are both on the same page about dismantling the fourth estate - just differing motivations. I don’t think motives will matter if enough people pile on Trump‘s “any news I disagree with is fake or bad news” bandwagon.
The day democracy dies will be the day. The last professional journalist is believed because of people trying to dismantle the fourth estate because they do not understand how it works.
Do you also walk into your doctors or lawyers office, and begin mansplaining their profession to them? I hate to break it to you, but they aren’t going to listen either. For that matter, have you ever had a man try to explain a woman’s body to her and why it’s not working the way he wants it to?
If you want to make changes to an institution, it helps if you take the time to educate yourself as to how it works. When people refuse to do that they don’t understand which parts need to be dismantled, and which parts are working as intended.
If anyone reading this who genuinely wishes to understand the reasons behind journalistic norms and why Mike’s take misses the mark, I would be happy to elucidate.
Let me be very clear. Mike makes some very good and valid points. Trump is absolutely breaking the law and that is a story in and of itself. But because Mike has not taken the time to educate himself as to how professional journalism works no one other than angry people will listen to his specific arguments.
Ironically that’s one of the reasons Trump holds sway over MAGA. They are angry and he says what they want to hear regardless of how correct it is. And yet people complain all the time “don’t they know anything!”
It would be helpful and informative to know precisely what Mike wrote that misses the mark. We all know that he’s not a trained journalist, but he’s highly observant and analytically skilled and what he has written about the complicity (unwitting, as he sees it) of your profession in the rise of Trump and his authoritarianism comports with the observations of many commentators who are indeed professional journalists. Not trying to be contrary for the sake of it, but please name the missed mark(s)…
If you are so literate about how "professional journalism " works, why not just explain it to those of us who aren't in the profession instead of crapping all over the author?
After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.
It is not an unreasonable reading of the North Atlantic Treaty that the US cannot withdraw at all, or at least cannot withdraw without the assent of all parties to the treaty to amend Article 13 to specify some other method of withdrawal.
Thank you for this. I don't know whether it would diminish the piece or add to it, but I'm confident you could find at least a half dozen other examples of the President doing something manifestly and blatantly illegal while the press frame it as just another policy option under consideration.
Thank you, thank you, thank you a thousand times over for this!
My blood boils when I hear about OLC memos, as it did way back in 2016 when I kept hearing it about the Mueller investigation, and how Mueller said he could not even state that Trump WOULD be indicted if he weren’t the president-elect.
It amazes me that journalists whose entire job is to cover the Executive branch can’t be bothered to learn these things.
So on target Mike. I am sharing this with friends who seem to equate criticism of traditional "progressive" and "liberal" media with fostering division, or wanting to shut down that media. No! It's accountability we want and thank you for stating it so clearly and forcefully.
A very important and necessary piece, Mike. Thank you for articulating so well what needs to be said. Institutional or mainstream journalism is complicit in our descent into fascist authoritarianism. Indeed, complicit as an unwitting part (mostly - Fox News, e.g., is a wittingly committed architect) of the very infrastructure of authoritarian capture. I agree 100% with your takedown of these media businesses on the NATO “debate” (as if…). Insofar as they cover this administration, they routinely show a degree of deference or timidity across a range of issues that reeks of cowardice. Exhibit “A” could not only include all the media stories that you listed about the NATO “debate” but also many of the journalists who pose milquetoast questions to Berlin Betty (aka, Karoline Leavitt) at WH press conferences - a press secretary whose nonresponsive responses seem lifted straight from the pages of the Goebbels diaries …
Really good post, Mike! I'm not sure Journalists will be drawn to read this from the title, which is disappointing, because you have something sooo important to say in the article. Especially your last couple of paragraphs as to 'all you need to do..' I read that and it spoke a marketing message to Journalists loudly: 'A secret to delivering break-news that's unique, engaging, and edgy to set yourself apart: Add a Constitutionally aligned word/ special phrase/ sentence that will additionally be noted as your being on the right side of history at a pivotal point for USA. Your grandchildren will likely ask "did you write to save ... (truth, Constitution, Democracy)? If it's no... why you didn't write the Truth that could have saved Democracy for me... ' Kids don't lie or play games like 'Adults'.
Thanks for your really thoughtful post. You hit on a pet peeve of mine (hence my rant...)
JoAn - as a former professional journalist I can tell you why journalists will brush it off. Mike makes some very good points, but he doesn’t know anymore about how professional journalism actually works than Trump knows how government works.
And they are both on the same page about dismantling the fourth estate - just differing motivations. I don’t think motives will matter if enough people pile on Trump‘s “any news I disagree with is fake or bad news” bandwagon.
The day democracy dies will be the day. The last professional journalist is believed because of people trying to dismantle the fourth estate because they do not understand how it works.
Do you also walk into your doctors or lawyers office, and begin mansplaining their profession to them? I hate to break it to you, but they aren’t going to listen either. For that matter, have you ever had a man try to explain a woman’s body to her and why it’s not working the way he wants it to?
If you want to make changes to an institution, it helps if you take the time to educate yourself as to how it works. When people refuse to do that they don’t understand which parts need to be dismantled, and which parts are working as intended.
If anyone reading this who genuinely wishes to understand the reasons behind journalistic norms and why Mike’s take misses the mark, I would be happy to elucidate.
Let me be very clear. Mike makes some very good and valid points. Trump is absolutely breaking the law and that is a story in and of itself. But because Mike has not taken the time to educate himself as to how professional journalism works no one other than angry people will listen to his specific arguments.
Ironically that’s one of the reasons Trump holds sway over MAGA. They are angry and he says what they want to hear regardless of how correct it is. And yet people complain all the time “don’t they know anything!”
It would be helpful and informative to know precisely what Mike wrote that misses the mark. We all know that he’s not a trained journalist, but he’s highly observant and analytically skilled and what he has written about the complicity (unwitting, as he sees it) of your profession in the rise of Trump and his authoritarianism comports with the observations of many commentators who are indeed professional journalists. Not trying to be contrary for the sake of it, but please name the missed mark(s)…
If you are so literate about how "professional journalism " works, why not just explain it to those of us who aren't in the profession instead of crapping all over the author?
Article 13
After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.
It is not an unreasonable reading of the North Atlantic Treaty that the US cannot withdraw at all, or at least cannot withdraw without the assent of all parties to the treaty to amend Article 13 to specify some other method of withdrawal.
Thank you for this. I don't know whether it would diminish the piece or add to it, but I'm confident you could find at least a half dozen other examples of the President doing something manifestly and blatantly illegal while the press frame it as just another policy option under consideration.
Thank you, thank you, thank you a thousand times over for this!
My blood boils when I hear about OLC memos, as it did way back in 2016 when I kept hearing it about the Mueller investigation, and how Mueller said he could not even state that Trump WOULD be indicted if he weren’t the president-elect.
It amazes me that journalists whose entire job is to cover the Executive branch can’t be bothered to learn these things.
“Main Stream Media is the propaganda arm of the military industrial complex” Frank Zappa.
True then, true now.
So on target Mike. I am sharing this with friends who seem to equate criticism of traditional "progressive" and "liberal" media with fostering division, or wanting to shut down that media. No! It's accountability we want and thank you for stating it so clearly and forcefully.
Similar to the “release the full Epstein files” bipartisan law
This needs to be required reading.
A very important and necessary piece, Mike. Thank you for articulating so well what needs to be said. Institutional or mainstream journalism is complicit in our descent into fascist authoritarianism. Indeed, complicit as an unwitting part (mostly - Fox News, e.g., is a wittingly committed architect) of the very infrastructure of authoritarian capture. I agree 100% with your takedown of these media businesses on the NATO “debate” (as if…). Insofar as they cover this administration, they routinely show a degree of deference or timidity across a range of issues that reeks of cowardice. Exhibit “A” could not only include all the media stories that you listed about the NATO “debate” but also many of the journalists who pose milquetoast questions to Berlin Betty (aka, Karoline Leavitt) at WH press conferences - a press secretary whose nonresponsive responses seem lifted straight from the pages of the Goebbels diaries …
Ha! Berlin Betty! 👍🏻 I tend to think of Leavitt as Eva Braun 2.0. There’s even a slight physical resemblance to Eva 1.0.
After all this I suggest to you teaching might be another career in your future.
Correct.
It is not the venal Trumpists but your vacuous sellout media and treasonous GOP who are the real threat to the Republic.
And a hard rain MUST fall or else a hard rain will befall you all!
Excellent points and it should be inserted into all the publications! Wouldn’t that be something.
A campaign to go after these publications would be welcome in our copious free and spare time!
But that’s just it: money. Billionaires own media and much is coercion. The Paul Krugmans take their football and come to substack.
BRAVO, Mike! Excellent post!