Getting the journalists out
Apparently the Trump administration has done a purge of journalists who report on the Trump administration? That’s what Dana Milbank says.
The White House eliminated most briefings and severely restricted access to official events. And this week came the coup de grace: After covering four presidents, I received an email informing me that Trump’s press office had revoked my White House credential.
I’m not the only one. I was part of a mass purge of “hard pass” holders after the White House implemented a new standard that designated as unqualified almost the entire White House press corps, including all seven of The Post’s White House correspondents. White House officials then chose which journalists would be granted “exceptions.” It did this over objections from news organizations and the White House Correspondents’ Association.
What’s the qualification they lack? I’m guessing it must be Worshipful Attitude to Trump?
The Post requested exceptions for its seven White House reporters and for me, saying that this access is essential to our work (in my case, I often write “sketches” describing the White House scene). The White House press office granted exceptions to the other seven, but not to me. I strongly suspect it’s because I’m a Trump critic. The move is perfectly in line with Trump’s banning of certain news organizations, including The Post, from his campaign events and his threats to revoke White House credentials of journalists he doesn’t like.
…
Now, virtually the entire White House press corps is credentialed under “exceptions,” which means, in a sense, that they all serve at the pleasure of press secretary Sarah Sanders because they all fail to meet credentialing requirements — and therefore, in theory, can have their credentials revoked any time they annoy Trump or his aides, like CNN’s Jim Acosta did.
Another arm of the dictatorship monster.
It really is a coup in slow motion.
What about the First Amendment?
The First Amendment doesn’t have anything to do with the White House and press coverage as far as I know.
It’s…you know, one of those norms we keep hearing about, that Trump loves to ignore and flout. It’s a norm that the White House should be wide open to press coverage, but it’s not written into the Constitution, that I know of.
For the First Amendment to work, the press must have access. These are matters of state, and important for citizens to be informed about. That’s what the First Amendment is FOR, dammit. What are these new “qualifications”? This is every bit as much of a prior restraint on speech/press, BECAUSE OF the content of the speech, as any legislative enactment.
Oh, duh, I see what you’re saying. Sorry for obtusity.
I really really want to know, what is this new “standard” that renders almost all of the professional press corps “unqualified” to be journalists covering the Whote House? The public has a right to know: what are the criteria?
The article said it was to do with number of days reporting over the past X number of years. Seriously.