The Media Needs To Be Fair to Trump. And They Can't 'Fake' It.

on Feb 20, 2025

SAN DIEGO -- To deflect from his own misdeeds, mistakes and mayhem, President Donald Trump likes to accuse the mainstream media of ginning up "fake news."

But one thing that the folks in the Fourth Estate can't fake -- and no longer even bother trying to hide -- is their dislike and disrespect for Trump. Those negative feelings also carry over to Trump's policies, Cabinet members and executive actions.

Now that Trump is back in the White House, the liberal media is back on its war footing. After four years of throwing softballs and covering up for Joe Biden's feebleness and frailty, they're once again in their happy place where they speak truth to power.

I'm glad that the media is happy. It's our job, after all, to hold elected officials accountable. What bothers me is how my colleagues conduct themselves where Trump is concerned. Judging from polls showing public trust in media institutions to be at an all-time low, the same thing bothers millions of other Americans.

For our own good, the media needs to be fairer to Trump than we were during his first term, and than we've been so far one month into his second.

That means doing five things: giving Trump credit for what he does right; spreading the criticism to Democrats so they get taken to task for what they do wrong; examining every issue with a 360-degree perspective, complete with nuance; putting all stories in their proper context so Americans get the full picture; and, last but not least, being willing to acknowledge our own mistakes as journalists.

These matters can be complicated. To prove it, here's a fun fact about so-called fake news. A lot of Americans probably think that Trump invented the phrase, because he is so closely identified with it.

That's the real falsity. The term was coined by someone else, and Trump shamelessly pilfered it in much the same way that the con man is now threatening to steal Greenland and the Panama Canal.

In December 2016, about a month after losing the presidency to Trump, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech to Congress in which she asked lawmakers to combat misleading news on social media. Clinton insisted that the U.S. political system and American citizens were both threatened by an "epidemic of malicious fake news and false propaganda that flooded social media."

Clinton also used the phrase "fake news" to wave off questions from reporters about her use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state, and the lengths to which she appears to have gone to destroy any trace of the emails on that server.

The fact that it was Hillary Clinton of all people who appears to have introduced the phrase "fake news" into the political lexicon presents conservative Republicans with a bit of a conundrum, if they're honest enough to acknowledge it.

After all, many on the right wing thought something was amiss with the story of Clinton's emails. In fact, at the time, there was much speculation that those breadcrumbs would lead back to the Clinton Foundation. There were questions about whether Clinton was using her official position as Secretary of State to pressure foreign leaders and foreign business interests to contribute millions of dollars to the foundation. And what about those mid-six-figure speaking gigs that former President Bill Clinton was racking up while his wife was running U.S. foreign policy at Foggy Bottom?

These are the questions that Hillary Clinton tried to brush aside by invoking the phrase "fake news" -- the same questions that conservative Republicans wanted answered.

So how do all those dots connect for those on the right wing? I think I've got it: Almost a decade ago, it was wrong for Clinton to use the phrase to dismiss criticism of her. But now it's perfectly appropriate when conservatives use it to dismiss criticism of Trump?

The old saying dictates that, when human beings are deciding what to be outraged about, it all depends on whose ox is being gored. Here it seems that whether the news is actually fake depends on who the news is about -- and, even more so, who it makes uncomfortable.

As a journalist, I'm all for intense media scrutiny. Just as the media is supposed to hold elected officials accountable, someone also needs to monitor the watchdogs and keep us honest. But that raises a question: Just whose job is it to make sure the monitors are honest?

========

To find out more about Ruben Navarrette and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.