Journalism

The question of how to cover the alt-right and its leaders has long been a complicated one. It's grown even more so given that President Donald Trump appointed leaders of that movement—including White House adviser Steve Bannon, who previously ran the alt-right media company Breitbart—to his staff. At its core, the mainstream press is grappling with this conundrum: Ignore these groups and risk allowing a potential public threat to go unreported; shine too bright a light on them, and risk amplifying their message—or worse, attracting new acolytes to the cause.

There’s no right approach to covering this growing movement, but one thing is certain: The press has erred on the side of overexposure. It’s positioned the alt-right in the center of President Trump's story, in part because of the shock value of the movement’s actions. This fringe group has taken the country’s implicit history of racism and made it explicit, which is certainly newsworthy. But that's brought unpleasant side effects, namely, giving the leaders of these hate groups coverage disproportionate to their influence. After all, it took a whole lot of mainstream Republicans to help usher President Trump into office. He received the greatest number of primary votes in the history of the Republican party. He also won the general election with 88 percent of Republican party votes, according to exit polls. The right got President Trump elected; the alt-right was merely a subset. But as Trump's comments indicate, he clearly believes it is a crucial subset.

What would possess the president of the United States, after he finally called out white supremacists, to return a day later to the flimsy position that attracted so much criticism in the first place? Part of the answer is that he hates the media and just can't stand to give reporters what they want — or admit that he was wrong.

Take it from someone who knows President Trump pretty well. “I think there's — it's almost like a counterintuitive thing with him, as it relates to the media,” former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci told Stephen Colbert on “Late Show.” “The media's expecting him to do something; he sometimes does the exact opposite.” Scaramucci shared his insight before President Trump doubled down on remarks he delivered over the weekend, when white supremacists protesting the removal of a Confederate statue in Charlottesville clashed with counterprotesters. Though it was a Nazi sympathizer who drove a car into a crowd, killing one and injuring 19 others, the president reiterated his position that “both sides” were to blame for the violence while speaking at an impromptu news conference at Trump Tower in New York. This was President Trump, furious at the media, freelancing in self-destructive fashion.

President Donald Trump fashions himself as a CEO president. But he's feuding with one of America's most famous, most respected and wealthiest business leaders -- Amazon's Jeff Bezos -- mainly because the company is so successful. In his latest attack on Amazon, President Trump said on Twitter that Amazon "is doing great damage to tax paying retailers. Towns, cities and states throughout the U.S. are being hurt - many jobs being lost." It is true that Amazon has wreaked havoc on the traditional retail industry.

The present work proposes the use of social media as a tool for better understanding the relationship between a journalists’ social network and the content they produce. Specifically, we ask: what is the relationship between the ideological leaning of a journalist’s social network on Twitter and the news content he or she produces? Using a novel dataset linking over 500,000 news articles produced by 1,000 journalists at 25 different news outlets, we show a modest correlation between the ideologies of who a journalist follows on Twitter and the content he or she produces. This research can provide the basis for greater self-reflection among media members about how they source their stories and how their own practice may be colored by their online networks. For researchers, the findings furnish a novel and important step in better understanding the construction of media stories and the mechanics of how ideology can play a role in shaping public information.

President Donald Trump angrily defended himself on Aug 15 against criticism that he did not specifically condemn Nazi and white supremacist groups following the weekend’s deadly racial unrest in Virginia, and at one point questioned whether the movement to pull down statues of Confederate leaders would escalate to the desecration of George Washington.

In a long, combative exchange with reporters at Trump Tower in Manhattan, the president repeatedly rejected a torrent of bipartisan criticism for waiting two days before naming the right-wing groups and placing blame on “many sides” for the violence on Aug 12 that ended with the death of a young woman after a car crashed into a crowd. He said that “before I make a statement, I like to know the facts.” And he criticized “alt-left” groups that he claimed were “very, very violent” when they sought to confront the white nationalist and Nazi groups that had gathered in Charlottesville (VA) to protest the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee from a park. He said there is “blame on both sides.” President Trump unleashed a torrent of frustration at the news media, saying they were being “fake” because they did not acknowledge that his initial statement about the Charlottesville protest was “very nice.” Again and again, President Trump said that the portrayal of nationalist protesters in the city were not all Nazis or white supremacists, and he said it was unfair to suggest that they were.

Theories abound about why President Donald Trump has repeatedly insisted that “many sides” are to blame for the white supremacist-fueled violence in Virginia over the weekend. Some suggested the president does not want to alienate whites who voted for him out of a sense of racial grievance. Others said he was offering his white nationalist supporters a wink and a nod. Yet another concluded advisers like Stephen K. Bannon must be influencing President Trump.

But there is an alternate explanation, one that is espoused by many on the right and repeated on an almost daily basis in the conservative news media that consumes so much of the president’s attention and energy. In this version of events, a violent and dangerous left fringe is ignored by news media that would rather elevate far-right extremism as the nation’s more urgent threat. This view of the left as unhinged and anarchistic has become popular with some Republicans who insist that Democrats still refuse to accept Mr. Trump. And it stokes the powerful emotions behind perceptions of excessive political correctness and media bias.

President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign said that CNN has denied its offer to buy air time for a campaign ad, marking the second time the network has refused to run a pro-Trump campaign spot. The ad, called “Let President Trump Do His Job,” accuses the media of “attacking our president” and briefly displays pictures of news anchors from several news outlets, including CNN anchors Jake Tapper, Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper.

“The president’s enemies don’t want him to succeed,” the ad states. “Let President Trump do his job.” The ad also touts U.S. economic growth, the stock market, jobs figures and military strength, while accusing Democrats of obstruction. “One of the many reasons that so many millions of Americans support President Trump is because of their complete mistrust of the mainstream news media, and the president’s refusal to allow their biased filter to interfere with his messages,” Trump campaign executive director Michael Glassner said in a statement.

President Donald Trump evidently doesn't know the definition of "press conference." Aug 11, after two days of unusual engagement with the White House press corps, President Trump promised to hold a "pretty big press conference" at the White House on Aug 14. But the White House didn't set up any press conference. Instead, he gave a hastily-arranged speech without answering any questions. When he came before cameras a second time Aug 14, and CNN's Jim Acosta, who was in the room serving as pool reporter, asked about the lack of a presser, President Trump said, "We had a press conference. We just had a press conference." President Trump's declaration that "we had a press conference" seemed to confirm what some White House correspondents already surmised -- that Trump is counting any appearance in front of the press corps as a press conference.

President Donald Trump and CNN’s Jim Acosta traded barbs Aug 14 when the reporter pressed President Trump to take questions about his response to the weekend white supremacist rally in Charlottesville (VA). President Trump made a statement earlier on Aug 14 and said that “racism is evil” and specifically criticized the KKK, Nazis and other groups that organized the rally for the first time. But he did not take questions from reporters, despite later calling it a "press conference." At a second announcement later in the day, President Trump said he is launching an investigation into China’s trade practices. As that announcement ended, Acosta asked Trump if reporters could ask him questions about his remarks on Charlottesville. “It doesn’t bother me at all, but I like real news, not fake news,” Trump said, pointing at Acosta. “You’re fake news.” “Haven’t you spread a lot of fake news yourself, sir?” Acosta shot back.

[Commentary] At a certain point, we must all pause to ask: How is it that the only time our mouthy, straight-shooting, politically incorrect president seems to bite his tongue is when he is called upon to denounce white supremacists? Does it have much to do with the fact that he lines the senior ranks of his administration with outspoken white supremacists, including Steve Bannon, formerly of Breitbart? And why is the administration so interested in curbing civil rights investigations and stopping funding for counter-white nationalism efforts? These questions should trouble every American, and therefore be on the tip of the tongue of every journalist.

Until we get real answers, it’s time to stop calling the president’s favored political zealots by their favored self-identifying term. Journalists can’t allow agents of hatred to set how they are defined. Their rebrand is little more than a cover-up for white supremacists to continue to commit foul acts of disrespect, intimidation, and violence.

[Shaya Tayefe Mohajer is a freelance journalist in Los Angeles.]