 Ten years into covering Donald Trump — I hope I don’t jinx myself and my peers by saying — American news media organizations seem to have mostly figured out how to cover Donald Trump. Take the contrast with our British media counterparts this week. On Sunday, the BBC’s director-general and the chief executive of BBC News resigned after the Telegraph revealed that the British broadcaster had misleadingly edited a Trump speech to remove his call for supporters to act “peacefully” on Jan. 6, 2021. After watching the offending BBC documentary clip, I think the Trump team has a point. Unlike the nonsense complaints about CBS News’ editing of former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 interview, Trump’s words in the documentary were stitched together to amplify his rhetoric in a way that did not match exactly what he said onstage. (Even if the result — that his supporters proceeded to violently riot at the Capitol — is not seriously up for debate.) It’s a mistake you’re less likely to see from a major US news organization in 2025. Ten years in, American broadcasters and news organizations expect pushback from the president and his allies; tough stories and packages are edited more closely, and organizations come ready to defend pieces they know will receive intense criticism from the administration (see the X account for The New York Times’ communications department). News media organizations make mistakes covering Trump, and any subject, and will continue to do so. But if there’s any silver lining in Trump’s threats against the press, it’s that his campaign’s (and now, administration’s) aggression has forced many newsrooms to button up their reporting, at least when it comes to a guy who will almost certainly express his opinions about it. Also today: Axel Springer’s CEO looks for deals, and the latest from the WBD bidding wars. |