FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

How the New York Times Enhances Trump’s Propaganda

Photograph Source: Torrenegra – CC BY 2.0

The mendacity of Donald Trump is without parallel in the history of American presidential politics.  His lies, as tabulated by the Washington Post’s fact checker, number in the thousands.  U.S. truth tellers have become Trump’s favorite targets as Inspectors General, federal judges, intelligence officers, and the nation’s media face constant punishment and harassment from the White House, and the charge of “fake news” has created doubt and cynicism within the American populace.  For these reasons, it is troubling to see the most prominent member of the mainstream media, The New York Times, highlight stories that turn on presidential lies while minimizing the seminal statements of whistleblowers who take great personal and political risk in testifying to the ignorance and corruption of the president of the United States.

A current example of such bad journalism is the May 15, 2020 edition of the New York Times.  On the front page of the Times (and “above the fold” to boot) is Peter Baker’s article on Trump’s latest campaign against President Barack Obama, now given the politically charged catchphrase of “Obamagate.”  The charge is a typical Trumpian diversionary tactic that has no substantive or evidentiary basis in fact.  Meanwhile, on the inside pages of the Times, we find the testimony of a courageous whistleblower, Dr. Rick Bright, the former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, who documented the Trump administration’s dereliction of duty in responding to the Covid-19 crisis.  Bright’s testimony was definitely front page news.

The “Obamagate” charge is disinformation, a total fraud. It should be confined to the echo chambers of Fox News and right-wing social media. But Baker’s article gives the story greater legs, and it is a perfect example of the false equivalence that has dominated the Times’ coverage of Trump since his campaign in 2015.  Half the article was devoted to Trump’s grievances with his predecessor, and Senator Lindsay Graham’s immediate willingness to investigate the phony charges.  And half was devoted to the fact that the accusations involved “undefined and unspecified crimes.”  The following day, an article in the Times concluded that it was Trump’s “unbending…belief” that Obama was “personally involved in a plot against him.”  It is impossible to know what Trump actually believes so why would the Times give him the benefit of the doubt?

Several months ago, the Times’ impeachment coverage similarly invoked false equivalence with front page articles that described the “different impeachment realities that the two parties are living in.”  There was no mention of the fact that the Democratic reality was based on evidence and ground truth testimony; the Republican reality was woven out of conspiratorial cloth.  Only the Republicans resorted to conspiratorial theory, but Baker speciously referred to “conspiracy theorists in the White House and the Congress.”  Baker, moreover, described the impeachment of Bill Clinton in 1998 as the “ultimate drama,” whereas the Trump impeachment was dismissed as “bad entertainment and not terribly important.”  Of course this is exactly what the Trump administration wanted Americans to believe.

The slighting of Rick Bright was even more egregious because Bright testified that “lives were endangered, and I believe lives were lost.”   Bright as well as an executive of a medical mask maker in Texas, Mike Bowen, who described himself as a “Republican” who “voted for President Trump,” testified on May 14, 2020 to a House subcommittee that they provided sufficient warning of the impending crisis that was worsened by the administration’s desultory and deceitful handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

Last month, when the Trump administration replaced a top official at the Department of Health and Human Services who documented supply shortages and testing delays at hospitals all over the country, both the New York Times and the Washington Post buried this story on inside pages.  Last Friday, moreover, the Inspector General of the Department of State, Steve Linick, was fired—the fifth firing of an Inspector General in the past several weeks.  Linick’s “crime” was to open up an investigation of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for using a political appointee to perform personal tasks for the secretary and his wife.  The Saturday editions of the Times and the Washington Post made no mention of the firing.    In view of the presidential attacks on the CIA whistleblower who made possible the impeachment inquiry and the limited media support for whistleblowers, it is remarkable that this country can still count on testimony from such courageous and selfless individuals.

Without whistleblowers such as Dr. Rick Bright, the mainstream media would have great difficulty conducting investigative journalism; the congress would find it difficult to conduct genuine oversight and investigation; and the American public would be denied the information it requires to have informed opinions and make electoral decisions.  Our best journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times, understand this.  She wrote last year that “Trump’s weaponized disinformation” is “corrosive to democracy” regardless of its target, because it erodes the “political salience of reality.”  Conversely, a senior New York Times correspondent, Elaine Sciolino, told me years ago that contrarians and whistleblowers make good sources only in the short run, but journalists must rely on policymakers for long-term access and therefore should be careful not to offend.  This is the best explanation that I have ever received for the benign and conventional analysis provided by many in the press corps and their reluctance to challenge or simply embarrass high-level sources.

The media’s methodology of false equivalence and the failure to provide proper coverage of the testimony of whistleblowers serves to foster political ignorance and cynicism in this country.  If we are to avoid such cynicism, it is essential that the mainstream media provide the kind of information that enables citizens to tell the difference between fact and fiction. The dangerous disarray of the Trump administration and its ill-prepared national security team have made the importance of “telling truth to power” more essential than ever.  This is true for both officials within the federal bureaucracy and the mainstream media.

More articles by:

Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins University.  A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA and National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism. and A Whistleblower at the CIA. His most recent book is “American Carnage: The Wars of Donald Trump” (Opus Publishing), and he is the author of the forthcoming “The Dangerous National Security State” (2020).” Goodman is the national security columnist for counterpunch.org.

Weekend Edition
August 14, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Matthew Hoh
Lights! Camera! Kill! Hollywood, the Pentagon and Imperial Ambitions.
Joseph Grosso
Bloody Chicken: Inside the American Poultry Industry During the Time of COVID
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: It Had to be You
H. Bruce Franklin
August 12-22, 1945: Washington Starts the Korean and Vietnam Wars
Pete Dolack
Business as Usual Equals Many Extra Deaths from Global Warming
Paul Street
Whispers in the Asylum (Seven Days in August)
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Predatory Capitalism and the Nuclear Threat in the Age of Trump
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
‘Magical Thinking’ has Always Guided the US Role in Afghanistan
Ramzy Baroud
The Politics of War: What is Israel’s Endgame in Lebanon and Syria?
Ron Jacobs
It’s a Sick Country
Eve Ottenberg
Trump’s Plan: Gut Social Security, Bankrupt the States
Richard C. Gross
Trump’s Fake News
Jonathan Cook
How the Guardian Betrayed Not Only Corbyn But the Last Vestiges of British Democracy
Joseph Natoli
What Trump and the Republican Party Teach Us
Robert Fisk
Can Lebanon be Saved?
Brian Cloughley
Will Biden be Less Belligerent Than Trump?
Kenn Orphan
We Do Not Live in the World of Before
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Compromise & the Status Quo
Andrew Bacevich
Biden Wins, Then What?
Thomas Klikauer – Nadine Campbell
The Criminology of Global Warming
Michael Welton
Toppled Monuments and the Struggle For Symbolic Space
Prabir Purkayastha
Why 5G is the First Stage of a Tech War Between the U.S. and China
Daniel Beaumont
The Reign of Error
Adrian Treves – John Laundré
Science Does Not Support the Claims About Grizzly Hunting, Lethal Removal
David Rosen
A Moment of Social Crisis: Recalling the 1970s
Maximilian Werner
Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf: Textual Manipulations in Anti-wolf Rhetoric
Pritha Chandra
Online Education and the Struggle over Disposable Time
Robert Koehler
Learning from the Hibakushas
Seth Sandronsky
Teaching in a Pandemic: an Interview With Mercedes K. Schneider
Dean Baker
Financing Drug Development: What the Pandemic Has Taught Us
Greta Anderson
Blaming Mexican Wolves for Livestock Kills
Evaggelos Vallianatos
The Meaning of the Battle of Salamis
Mel Gurtov
The World Bank’s Poverty Illusion
Paul Gilk
The Great Question
Rev. Susan K. Williams Smith
Trump Doesn’t Want Law and Order
Martin Cherniack
Neo-conservatism: The Seductive Lure of Lying About History
Nicky Reid
Pick a Cold War, Any Cold War!
George Wuerthner
Zombie Legislation: the Latest Misguided Wildfire Bill
Lee Camp
The Execution of Elephants and Americans
Christopher Brauchli
I Read the News Today, Oh Boy…
Tony McKenna
The Truth About Prince Philip
Louis Proyect
MarxMail 2.0
Sidney Miralao
Get Military Recruiters Out of Our High Schools
Jon Hochschartner
Okra of Time
David Yearsley
Bringing Landscapes to Life: the Music of Johann Christian Bach
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail