The Media vs. Trump story that’s been overlooked: Freedom of Speech

[Commentary] There’s one complicated Media vs. Donald Trump story playing out that’s been overlooked. I speak of the media coverage of the Trump protests that have disrupted many of his appearances and, somewhat regrettably, they leave me having to stand up for Donald Trump. Why? Because the First Amendment does not take sides, not even against pumpkin-haired, nonsense-spewing, bloviating demagogues.

I was once part of the Beltway media elite, now transplanted to Arizona. Maybe it’s because I’m far from the center of the media action, but to me this particular coverage is distinctive in two ways. One, the media is having a material effect on the race. And two, it’s on the wrong side. It is the most unfair thing that this decidedly unfair man has suffered. Donald Trump is in a zone that deserves protection; he’s trying to run for office and wants to make his case. There’s a process in place to oppose him; it’s called an election. Do we really want disruptive, free speech-shattering protests part of our political process? If Trump doesn’t get the nomination, his supporters could well decide, not without justification, that since his campaign had been sabotaged they might well embark on similar activities. At minimum, a lingering resentment will forever give his adherents a dim but justified sense that they’ve been screwed. If you don’t like his ideas, vote for someone else. But if the people opposing him can’t get their message out without using anti-American tactics—and if we in the media don’t call them on it—we all cede the high ground. Is our democracy so weak it can’t handle Donald Trump?

[Bill Wyman is the former arts editor of NPR and Salon.com]