Speaking of journalism, the Trump campaign is no longer credentialing Michael Bloomberg’s reporters at Trump campaign events:
President Trump’s 2020 campaign announced Monday that it will no longer credential Bloomberg News reporters for its events after the outlet said it would not conduct investigations into the Democratic presidential candidates, but would continue to probe the Trump administration.
“The decision by Bloomberg News to formalize preferential reporting policies is troubling and wrong,” Brad Parscale, Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, said in a statement.
Bloomberg News announced last month that it would not investigate the Democratic presidential candidates after its owner, Mike Bloomberg, jumped into the race for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.
The outlet has long avoided probing its owner and said it would continue to do so as he seeks the nomination. To level the playing field, Bloomberg News said it would also not investigate the other Democratic presidential candidates [Oliver Darcy, “Trump Campaign Says It Will No Longer Credential Bloomberg News Reporters over Outlet’s 2020 Policy,” CNN, 2019.12.02].
Team Trump is right. Because billionaire Michael Bloomberg has said, “I don’t want all the reporters I’m paying to write a bad story about me,” we cannot look to Bloomberg News for fair and comprehensive coverage of the 2020 election. Allowing Bloomberg’s employees into a campaign rally doesn’t make any sense for any opposing candidate.
I’ve faced a similar quandary when blogging while running for public office here in South Dakota. I’ve blogged my own campaign, my opponents’, and the campaigns of other candidates on the same ballot as I. I’ve argued my case, but I’ve always done so with the best facts available. Nonetheless, I wouldn’t expect the South Dakota Republican Party to issue me journalist credentials for their state convention while I’m on the ballot. I’ve even chosen not to attend local Brown County Reagan lunches to report on their speakers while my name is on a ballot. Running for office complicates blogging in ways I do not like.
If journalists can’t act independently of candidates, journalists can’t tell the full story. Journalists and their owners may run for office, but entering the political ring changes the relationship between those journalists, the other campaigns, and the public.
Bloomberg has hamstrung his own reporters. He can run a news organization that can provide full coverage of the Presidential campaign, or he can run for President, but he can’t do both. Until Bloomberg sells his news organization to someone else or until he thickens his skin and lets his reporters do their job, he can’t expect other candidates to treat his reporters the same way other candidates treat reporters not taking paychecks from their opponents.
hI,
So, where does one draw the line with advocacy type journalism such as FOX or Sinclair or other more closely associated groups (eg., the ‘ACORN’ sting guys)? Didn’t a former politician try to punish FOX and how did that work out?
When Mayor Bloomberg is elected President (and, he will be) his news organization will morph into his PR group.
I’ll discuss why he’s the most valid candidate to stand up to the bully. Otherwise, just watch how he uses the Trump 2016 model to dissect the cred of every other candidate.
Ps … he was born on Valentine’s Day ♥
Counterprogramming a Manhattan billionaire with a Manhattan billionaire is bad strategy.
No, it’s not. It’s perfect balance.
Plutocrat vs. plutocrat? That’s not a matchup to fire the base. The only way we win this election is by getting everyone who showed for Clinton in 2016 to show up again and get people disenchanted with Clinton to get out of their chairs and vote for the Democratic nominee. Bloomberg decreases grass-roots enthusiasm and drives a similar number of Dems to stay home. He also gives plenty of independents an excuse to say, “See? There’s no difference between the two parties. Why bother voting?”
But the merits of running another unaccountable billionaire for President do not change the justifiability of any campaigns refusal to recognize Bloomberg’s employees as independent journalists deserving press credentials.
With all due respect, you have a sheltered view of the political pulse of USA. I read newspapers from Boston, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and sometimes Chicago every morning. Bloomberg is seen as a moderate and a liberal philanthropist among a group of extremist candidates. Also, he’s viewed as someone who’s scared Trump for 30 years, can stand up to him with inside information at the debates, and can afford to make Trump think twice before he tries to outspend we Dems. I call him a moderate Bernie without the yelling.You’ll warm up to him.
Any purported independent who claims that: “There’s no difference between the two parties. Why bother voting?” is either totally in a fog and blinded by a bias leading to irrational thinking or not really an independent at all, but instead is simply someone trying to undermine support for any Democrat. Worrying that type of voter seems a fool’s errand as no matter who is nominated that type of thinking will not respond in the manner hoped for by Democrats.
I would argue that Bloomberg can both run for office and run a news organization, but you’re right, not when he interferes with his news division. In the same way that business people are expected to put their corporate assets and companies in a holding company while they are in office, he needs to be hands off with his news company and let them operate independently. Telling them what they can and can’t report on makes him no better than Fox News or Sinclair.
I am in agreement with you that having another businessman buying his way into the election and telling us that he’s smarter than everyone else and only he can fix it (which I believe he’s said) isn’t the solution, it’s just echoes the way we got into this mess in the first place.