海角大神

When President Trump retweeted a meme earlier this week, sending out a cartoonishly doctored video that showed him clotheslining a person representing CNN, it escalated the conflict between Mr. Trump and the press 鈥� a conflict that may be fundamentally changing journalism.

For the president, his tweet was a 鈥渕odern-day presidential鈥� counter-punch to his critics, drawing on the scripted spectacles of professional wrestling. But coming on the heels of his recent Twitter attacks on and his reference in February to the nation鈥檚 news media as 聽many journalists took it seriously.

They saw not a joke but . The Committee to Protect Journalists and other professional organizations weighed in, and CNN saying, 鈥淚t is a sad day when the President of the United States encourages violence against reporters.鈥�

As press watchers and members of the media wrestle with the president鈥檚 rhetoric, some have begun to question a central tenet of modern journalism: striving to be objective and nonpartisan, conveying the news of the day with calm gravitas. But Mr. Trump is not the only disrupter in media; his presidency coincides with fast-paced changes in society and technology that are also reshaping journalism.

鈥淲e are without a doubt now and into the future moving into a more interpretive, perspectival journalism, and the attempt to define 鈥榦bjectivity,鈥� or 鈥榞ood journalism,鈥� as a kind of stenography that gives facts and facts only is really outdated,鈥� says Stephen J. A. Ward, author of 鈥淭he Invention of Journalism Ethics: The Path to Objectivity and Beyond.鈥� 鈥淚t鈥檚 not going to fly anymore, and I don鈥檛 even think it鈥檚 a good idea.鈥�

How media treated George Washington

The question of the media鈥檚 proper role in society predates the current war of words between President Trump and the mainstream press, of course. Indeed, many scholars note that the very concept of nonpartisan and neutral journalism evolved within its own complex and stormy history.

The only profession mentioned in the Constitution, the press has long been seen as essential to the idea of democratic self-governance. Free speech, enshrined in the , is one of the bulwarks of individual liberty and equality. 聽 聽聽

This has not always included the idea of impartiality and objectivity, however. In the 18th and 19th century, in fact, most newspapers were often aggressively partisan. As one anti-Federalist paper after George Washington left office: 鈥淚f ever a nation was debauched by a man, the American nation has been debauched by Washington.鈥澛�

Today, standards are different.

鈥淚 think for a long time now people judge quality in journalism by how 鈥榖alanced鈥� it is,鈥� says Mitchell Stephens, a professor of journalism at New York University in Manhattan. 鈥淚t seems that journalism is attacked for not being balanced more than it鈥檚 being attacked for not getting things right, or not being intelligent, or not being wise.鈥�

Professor Stephens, who is among those who say to the idea of nonpartisan journalism, traces the rise of disinterested, nonpartisan reporting in his latest book, 鈥淭he Voice of America: Lowell Thomas and the Invention of 20th-Century Journalism.鈥� He suggests that American news organizations, abandoning a 鈥減retense to objectivity,鈥� could be returning to their 鈥渓oud, boisterous, and combative鈥� ways of the past.

Professor Ward, founding director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, advocates instead for a 鈥渄emocratically engaged journalism,鈥� which views journalists as advocates for a pluralistic society. For Ward, the issue is less embracing partisanship than redefining the notion of being neutral 鈥� in contrast to what he calls the 鈥渄ualistic thinking鈥� in journalism ethics that holds you can be a disinterested reporter or an interest-driven advocate, but not both.
鈥淲hat we want to do is talk about informed, engaged journalism and a notion of objectivity as a method 鈥� a very flexible method that includes much more than simply reciting facts,鈥� he says. Such 鈥渄emocratically engaged journalism,鈥� would report on the needs of nation, and a political system, in which differing people must find ways to live with each other.

As such, he says, a 鈥減ragmatic objectivity鈥� would be fair to all points of view, but include a commitment to the needs of a diverse democracy. 鈥淎nd all of those journalists who鈥檝e won Pulitzer prizes, most thought they were reforming society, exposing what they saw as abuses of power,鈥� Ward says. 鈥淚鈥檓 sorry, but that鈥檚 not neutral.鈥�

Erosion of trust in media

But whether advocating for a plural democracy or embracing a more combative tone, mainstream news organizations face risks, at least in terms of public opinion.

CNN faced聽 for responding to the Trump wrestling meme by publishing that essentially included a veiled threat to the creator of the doctored Wrestlemania clip.

Since the person is a private citizen 鈥渨ho has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts,鈥� the person鈥檚 name would not be published, the cable news network said. Yet it added, 鈥溾��CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.鈥�

As Republicans and others expressed outrage at the network鈥檚 warning, #CNNBlackmail began to trend on Twitter.

鈥淎ny sympathy that CNN would have received after the president鈥檚 tweet, at least from me and lot of other journalists, I think 鈥� they just flushed that down the toilet,鈥� says Kevin Smith, deputy director of at the Ohio State University in Columbus. 鈥淚t was like, 鈥極K, we talked to him privately, and he agreed not to do it again, like he鈥檚 in the principal鈥檚 office. That鈥檚 a miss on CNN鈥檚 part. That struck me as petty and unnecessary.鈥�

In June, CNN was also forced to retract a story on its website that claimed the Senate was investigating links between a Russian bank and a close ally of Trump. The network apologized and three high-ranking journalists resigned.

The New York Times, too, had to and apologize for incorrectly linking a map produced by Sarah Palin鈥檚 political action committee to the 2011 shooting of Rep. Gabby Giffords. The Associated Press has also for its coverage of the Russian election meddling story. 聽

Such incidents have contributed to the erosion of trust in the media. On Monday, a new poll found that more Americans trust the Trump administration than the media. While nearly 37 percent of those polled said they only 30 percent could say the same about the media.

One of the reasons for this lack of trust, suggests Professor Smith, a longtime leader in the and chair of the committee tasked to revise the organization鈥檚 , is the erosion of the value of nonpartisan, neutral reporting.

鈥淢ost people are willing to understand and listen to both sides, to the possibilities of compromise in both the liberal and the conservative management of government,鈥� he says. 鈥淪o why would any organization want to alienate a huge segment of the population by suddenly deciding that we want to punt on neutral reporting and instead feed the beast on the left and right?鈥�