Exactly. The WH press corps should get off its collective ass and get busy reporting where the news is really made: in the bowels of the bureaucracy. Maybe then you wouldn’t be so confused and bewildered about the true salacious impact of the Trump/Musk hostile takeover of our government. Plus you wouldn’t have to eat and dutifully report Trump’s shit all the time on a daily basis.
I reluctantly disagree on this. The purpose of a White House correspondent is to cover the White House, not the rest of the bureaucracy. There are other correspondents in those agencies.
I would heartily support correspondents walking the hallways in search of interviews, but in the White House there aren't any hallways to walk. Best they can do is try to convince sources to meet them at Starbucks, where there is no privacy.
None of this excuses the supine response by the White House correspondence association and its individual members, but if we're going to criticize them for that we should also recognize that it's a hard job to do well, and it's a harder job to do well when all you have are Orwellian briefings and a spokesperson who is a young, blonde, female version of Raghubir Goyal. I take that back. Goyal is much more informed about global events.
I take your point but having worked out of a cubicle behind the briefing room for 10-plus years, I can tell you that the briefings were a waste of my time. Rarely was news made there that wasn’t pre-packaged by the government. My reporting was done on the phone, pager, and yes, at Starbucks.
Press corps could certainly afford to miss a few of the dog-and-pony shows to take a stand for the First Amendment
I didn't say correspondents should actually cover the briefing, only that they should cover the White House :-)
My knowledge is several degrees removed from your experience in the room, but I imagine the heart of the job is working with and around White House press staff to get unimpeded access to officials while simultaneously writing stuff that will make those officials interested in leaking to you.
To be fair, actually speaking up and saying it's Gulf of Mexico is probably a real hindrance to the latter objective, which is why correspondents act as they do.
Ron is absolutely right. We ex and current press and freedom-loving Americans need to get off our duffs and get loud, get vocal, go public for freedom of the press.
This argument that a united front will mean the eventual total control by Trump of White House coverage is as short-sighted as the thinking of the GOP legislators who had misgivings about him in his first term. How many times have we learned he won’t be stopped by giving him an inch because he will take a mile? So this is where we find ourselves — miles on down the road and destroying our country. Let’s be the ones to stand in his way. He most likely will take control of coverage of White House briefings and events. So what? Bring it on. He can’t control every voice. He can’t contain the truth. Only our fear and acquiescence give him more and more power to game the system and crush the Constitution.
I used to be a print reporter, back in the day when the saying "never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel" was still relevant. AP will carry on, whether it has a seat at WH briefings or not. Trump will carry on being the petty douche he always has been. I personally hope AP doesn't bend the knee on this.
I agree wholeheartedly with the press staying out of the briefings… it’s just Trump BS pouring from the mouth of a Trumpist press Secretary… I fully expect Trump plans to write a new Constitution and jam it down the throats of America - Shame on the complicit and Running-Dogs…. Those that are weak of character and prefer to be "in the right hand of the devil than in his path"
The media’s weakness Is Trump’s strength. Trump banning the AP from White House events isn’t just about one outlet—it’s a test of the media’s backbone. And so far, they’re failing. Instead of a unified, forceful pushback, we’ve seen weak statements and business as usual.
Trump doesn’t need laws to control the press—he just plays on their fear of losing access. He knows that if he punishes one outlet, the rest will hesitate to challenge him. This isn’t speculation—it’s a strategy used by leaders in Hungary, Turkey, and Russia to intimidate the press without outright censorship.
If the media doesn’t push back now, what happens next? Will The New York Times be blacklisted for refusing to use Trump’s preferred language? Will Fox News be punished for stepping out of line? Once news organizations start self-censoring to avoid conflict, the public loses its best defense against unchecked power.
A free press protects everyone, not just journalists. If the media won’t fight back, they’ll only find themselves weaker when the next challenge comes. And Trump knows it.
A boycott or a simple “There was another WH briefing today between 0900 and 1000.” This idea was the first idea in my head when I saw the AP was removed. Media can stand up to disrespect and the abuse that comes from this WH. That is actually news in and of itself. Exposing the lies in real time is what we expect from a free press. When we will we get it?
It is obviously government punishment for speech and therefore a violation of the first amendment. Why in the world does no one ever sue?! Is the constitution just a beautiful piece of parchment that can't be enforced by the courts?!
This is true of countless cases. General Millie had his security detail removed obviously for speech against the President, substantially physically endangering him. No lawsuit. Why?! No one even tries to defend their first amendment rights. Why?!
Nick Kristof thinks the White House will blink first. "AP reporters have stood up to dictators worldwide, even endured prison; they're tougher than Trump," the NYT columnist posted last night at X.
But Brian Stelter of CNN, who quotes you, Kristof and others at his latest Reliable Sources newsletter, has what seems like a more realistic take: "The wire service is in an impossible position. The Trump White House wants this fight. And it's not going to end at the shores of the Gulf."
The mainstream media has largely kow-towed to trump (and disgraced itself) with 'obedience in advance' with The Washington Post and the LA Times refraining from an endorsement of the Democratic Party before the election. Meta and X seem to be battling to determine which is the bigger social-media sewer - my money is on X, whose owner purchased a President and used disinformation to see him elected.
“Time normally wasted in the briefing room. . . “
Exactly. The WH press corps should get off its collective ass and get busy reporting where the news is really made: in the bowels of the bureaucracy. Maybe then you wouldn’t be so confused and bewildered about the true salacious impact of the Trump/Musk hostile takeover of our government. Plus you wouldn’t have to eat and dutifully report Trump’s shit all the time on a daily basis.
I reluctantly disagree on this. The purpose of a White House correspondent is to cover the White House, not the rest of the bureaucracy. There are other correspondents in those agencies.
I would heartily support correspondents walking the hallways in search of interviews, but in the White House there aren't any hallways to walk. Best they can do is try to convince sources to meet them at Starbucks, where there is no privacy.
None of this excuses the supine response by the White House correspondence association and its individual members, but if we're going to criticize them for that we should also recognize that it's a hard job to do well, and it's a harder job to do well when all you have are Orwellian briefings and a spokesperson who is a young, blonde, female version of Raghubir Goyal. I take that back. Goyal is much more informed about global events.
I take your point but having worked out of a cubicle behind the briefing room for 10-plus years, I can tell you that the briefings were a waste of my time. Rarely was news made there that wasn’t pre-packaged by the government. My reporting was done on the phone, pager, and yes, at Starbucks.
Press corps could certainly afford to miss a few of the dog-and-pony shows to take a stand for the First Amendment
I didn't say correspondents should actually cover the briefing, only that they should cover the White House :-)
My knowledge is several degrees removed from your experience in the room, but I imagine the heart of the job is working with and around White House press staff to get unimpeded access to officials while simultaneously writing stuff that will make those officials interested in leaking to you.
To be fair, actually speaking up and saying it's Gulf of Mexico is probably a real hindrance to the latter objective, which is why correspondents act as they do.
This is a statement. :-|
Ron is absolutely right. We ex and current press and freedom-loving Americans need to get off our duffs and get loud, get vocal, go public for freedom of the press.
This argument that a united front will mean the eventual total control by Trump of White House coverage is as short-sighted as the thinking of the GOP legislators who had misgivings about him in his first term. How many times have we learned he won’t be stopped by giving him an inch because he will take a mile? So this is where we find ourselves — miles on down the road and destroying our country. Let’s be the ones to stand in his way. He most likely will take control of coverage of White House briefings and events. So what? Bring it on. He can’t control every voice. He can’t contain the truth. Only our fear and acquiescence give him more and more power to game the system and crush the Constitution.
I used to be a print reporter, back in the day when the saying "never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel" was still relevant. AP will carry on, whether it has a seat at WH briefings or not. Trump will carry on being the petty douche he always has been. I personally hope AP doesn't bend the knee on this.
All fine points
I agree wholeheartedly with the press staying out of the briefings… it’s just Trump BS pouring from the mouth of a Trumpist press Secretary… I fully expect Trump plans to write a new Constitution and jam it down the throats of America - Shame on the complicit and Running-Dogs…. Those that are weak of character and prefer to be "in the right hand of the devil than in his path"
The media’s weakness Is Trump’s strength. Trump banning the AP from White House events isn’t just about one outlet—it’s a test of the media’s backbone. And so far, they’re failing. Instead of a unified, forceful pushback, we’ve seen weak statements and business as usual.
Trump doesn’t need laws to control the press—he just plays on their fear of losing access. He knows that if he punishes one outlet, the rest will hesitate to challenge him. This isn’t speculation—it’s a strategy used by leaders in Hungary, Turkey, and Russia to intimidate the press without outright censorship.
If the media doesn’t push back now, what happens next? Will The New York Times be blacklisted for refusing to use Trump’s preferred language? Will Fox News be punished for stepping out of line? Once news organizations start self-censoring to avoid conflict, the public loses its best defense against unchecked power.
A free press protects everyone, not just journalists. If the media won’t fight back, they’ll only find themselves weaker when the next challenge comes. And Trump knows it.
Right on the money, 100%! Please keep persisting in voicing these facts!
A boycott or a simple “There was another WH briefing today between 0900 and 1000.” This idea was the first idea in my head when I saw the AP was removed. Media can stand up to disrespect and the abuse that comes from this WH. That is actually news in and of itself. Exposing the lies in real time is what we expect from a free press. When we will we get it?
Ron: You're right.
That means a lot coming from you, Peter. So sad
It is obviously government punishment for speech and therefore a violation of the first amendment. Why in the world does no one ever sue?! Is the constitution just a beautiful piece of parchment that can't be enforced by the courts?!
This is true of countless cases. General Millie had his security detail removed obviously for speech against the President, substantially physically endangering him. No lawsuit. Why?! No one even tries to defend their first amendment rights. Why?!
I agree, the news media should boycott, we’d all be better off…
Does Trump realize how much PRESS he is missing in the US and internationally by banning AP from covering him? Can that be quantified?
It can’t — but it’s a ton.
Some background on that here:
https://open.substack.com/pub/convulsions/p/trump-on-the-wire?r=dv6ls&utm_medium=ios
Nick Kristof thinks the White House will blink first. "AP reporters have stood up to dictators worldwide, even endured prison; they're tougher than Trump," the NYT columnist posted last night at X.
But Brian Stelter of CNN, who quotes you, Kristof and others at his latest Reliable Sources newsletter, has what seems like a more realistic take: "The wire service is in an impossible position. The Trump White House wants this fight. And it's not going to end at the shores of the Gulf."
Thanks for the heads up. I cannot predict
The mainstream media has largely kow-towed to trump (and disgraced itself) with 'obedience in advance' with The Washington Post and the LA Times refraining from an endorsement of the Democratic Party before the election. Meta and X seem to be battling to determine which is the bigger social-media sewer - my money is on X, whose owner purchased a President and used disinformation to see him elected.