Nearly two years into his second administration, it’s hard to be surprised by the actions of President Trump. But on September 18th when he banned news outlets Politico, MS Now, and CNN from the White House, he somehow managed to do just that. Trump has never been a stranger to making controversial choices, but this one has been widely considered way too far. Even Fox News, a conservative-leaning outlet that has consistently framed Trump positively, firmly condemned this action in a joint statement released by the five-network TV press pool covering the White House:
“The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government. No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting.”
Despite fierce public opposition, the White House has not backed down on their decision, publishing a press release addressing the situation titled, “White House Access Is a Privilege — Not a Right.” However, on Thursday, September 24, a federal judge temporarily blocked Trump’s ban, claiming it “unconstitutional.” This takes place amidst the major lawsuit that has been filed against the administration by the three banned networks. The story continues to develop daily, and there will surely be major updates to come.
Learning about this ban truly jarred me, as it did for many. Writing for a magazine like Her Campus has been a key part of expressing myself and shedding light on things that I feel matter. Freedom of expression is the absolute beating heart of this platform. But this ban extends beyond just expressing oneself. And it extends beyond the subjectivity of what “matters” to you or me. This is about the silencing of voices that don’t speak as our own and the repression of a right we’ve always stood firm in. The three outlets have a historically left-leaning content bias and have published many stories about Trump that paint him unfavorably. Since his first term in office, the case could be made that partisanship in the press is taking further steps than ever before. But nonetheless, targeted content about politicians is nothing new, and no president has taken such drastic action with the press so “unprecedented” before.
Something that denotes this ban so striking is that professional journalism, specifically top-tier outlets, can seem so untouchable. They’re on a pedestal that the public acknowledges and respects. Even while people debate unspoken biases or the credibility hierarchy, a consensus remains that established networks are so for a reason. CNN itself has been around for 46 years and was the world’s first 24 hour TV news network. It quickly earned itself an international reputation and has remained as a prominent global platform. So to see the stifling of the reporting abilities of this widely regarded network, should sound the alarms for everyone. This ban doesn’t just hurt consumers of CNN, MS NOW, or Politico—this hurts us all.
An internal attack on the press in a nation who chants “liberty for all” signals a major crack in our arrangement of leadership. The person who is first and foremost responsible for upholding these liberties should not be the one tearing them down. What kind of message does this send? That the opinions our leaders dislike should be silenced? That we should work to ban media that doesn’t align with our values? The president sets a bar that others follow, and he has just attempted to set the tone that restrictions like this are acceptable. Luckily, the steadfast efforts of the TV press pool to condemn Trump’s ban shows that there will be no tolerance for this action.