Connect with us

Opinions

Media screwing up politics coverage is a disservice to the public

Trump is not a normal candidate and opinions are not news

Published

on

More evident than ever is how newspapers, and other media, are desperately competing for business. In doing so, they are too often confusing opinion with reporting. While reporters are inserting more opinion in their columns, editorial boards are shying away from their role of endorsing candidates.

The New York Times recently announced it would no longer endorse in any political race except for president. The Times announcement seems a little schizophrenic. They took a strong stand helping to push Joe Biden to step down as a candidate, and stated forcefully they don’t support Trump. Then the publisher, A.G. Sulzberger, writes a lengthy op-ed published in the Washington Post where he “warned of a ‘quiet war’ against the freedom of the press as former President Trump pursues a second White House term with negative rhetoric about the media.”

He laments what Trump could do to free journalism, but seemingly disregards what a MAGA Congress could do to aid him, by having the Times in essence say it wouldn’t endorse against a MAGA congressional, or Senate candidate. He compares Trump to Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban and says, “Trump and his allies have hinted at their plans to increase attacks on the media, pointing to the former president’s comments last year in which he said, ‘When I win the presidency of the United States, they [Comcast] and others of the LameStream Media, will be thoroughly scrutinized for their knowingly dishonest and corrupt coverage of people, things and events.’” So, it’s really hard to figure the Times out.

Earlier this month, newspapers controlled by Alden Global Capital said “they would no longer endorse candidates for president, governor and the U.S. Senate. The newspapers in the hedge fund’s portfolio include dozens of dailies like the Chicago Tribune, New York Daily News, Boston Herald, Orlando Sentinel and San Jose Mercury News.” Then the Baltimore Sun said it would no longer make endorsements. Seems like an effort to offend fewer people, and sell more papers.

Mainstream media today are doing a disservice to the American people in how they deal with politics, the 2024 presidential election being a prime example. I want to be open: I write about politics, and the presidential election. I am a lifelong Democrat. But I am a columnist, not a reporter, and there is a huge difference. Columnists like myself share opinions. I try to base my opinions on facts, but some columnists actually use what Kellyanne Conway called, ‘alternative facts.’ Either way, what we columnists write, or say, is opinion.

On the other hand, reporters should always be writing about facts. They can write about what they have seen, or heard from others. They can freely quote someone else’s opinion in their columns, but they should leave their own opinion out. Today, that is often not happening. Too often we see reporters’ personal opinions subtly enter their columns. Then newspaper reporters go on TV, or comment on social media platforms. They share their personal opinions, which calls into question their reporting. Today, editors can take a good column, put a clickbait headline on it to attract attention, and that can often color how people perceive the column. Some of these headlines are not even what the column is actually about. Newspapers actually change a headline from the print edition to their online edition, simply to get more clicks.

The media will have a huge impact on how this election turns out. While they claim to only cover the news, and don’t make it, the reality is the media do much more. They seem to have adopted the role of influencer more than ever before, though they have always done this by determining how much attention they give any one issue, and of course by what they choose to report on. Yet today there is so much competition every outlet, print and TV, seems to feel the need to have a point of view to attract audiences. Seems in some ways contradictory to newspaper editorial boards saying they won’t endorse.

The mainstream media are generally covering this election as if Trump is a candidate like any other who has ever run for president. That is not the case. Many reporters appear to have a hard time dealing with Trump, and seem afraid to be honest when writing about, or talking about, or with him. That is one way to influence the election. When Biden was still in the race there was massive coverage of his age, and missteps, even before his disastrous debate performance. There was rarely a report on him that didn’t append his age and stumbles to his name. After the debate, the media pounced, and it was not just editorial comment. It was a really unusual situation, and covering it was important. But Trump’s lies had often been accepted, as were his stumbles in speeches. Then in the debate, in which Trump lied in every other utterance, that was seemingly forgotten.

Now Biden is out, and Kamala Harris is the nominee. This got wide coverage including, and up to, her choosing Gov. Walz as her running mate. Trump was out of the headlines and that seemed to drive him crazier than normal. But the media seemed to lay off of him for a bit. Now the media are criticizing Harris for a lack of policy papers, or doing interviews with them. I am OK with that, as long as they report Trump also has no real policy papers, except for Project 2025, which he claims isn’t his. The GOP platform is only 16 pages but has gotten little attention. Also, where is the discussion of Trump’s age, he is now the oldest person to ever run for president, and his speeches though loud, are often as embarrassing as was Biden’s debate performance. He can’t focus for more than two sentences at a time and often forgets where he is. Then where is the focus on Trump being a candidate for the highest office of the land, commander in chief, who has been found liable for sexual assault, and is a convicted felon. Aren’t those appellations that should fairly be appended to Trump’s name every time he is written about? These are indisputable facts, as was Biden’s age, always appended to stories about him.

I am not naïve enough to think the right-wing media like Fox News will do this. But I would expect those like the New York Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, and CBS, to do better. I would expect them to do to both Harris and Trump the same thing. Call them out when they are lying. When media report on either one’s speech, it is fine if they call out lies, or misstatements, in each. In the debate, if the media questioners refused to call out Trump on his lies, as happened in the Biden/Trump debate, Harris needs to be ready to do so. But it is really the media that has a responsibility to the American voter to do so.

I don’t expect much to change between now and Nov. 5 but can always hope. We will know by Tuesday night if ABC challenged Trump at the debate with tough questions. Did they ask him about being the oldest candidate ever to run for president? Did they ask him if he thinks a convicted felon should be commander in chief? Did they challenge his lies during the debate?  I am not holding out much hope for any of this. But I urge readers of, and listeners to, the mainstream media, to at least call them out when they pretend opinion is news, and when they continue to treat Trump as if he is the same as any other candidate to have ever run for president. He is not, and opinion is not news.

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Happy Thanksgiving to all

Dreaming of a brighter future for America

Published

on

(Photo by lilkar/Bigstock)

I hope you have a great Thanksgiving and can enjoy it with family and friends and that you have things you can be thankful for this past year. That you have your health. Now here is the column I would have liked to share with you this Thanksgiving: 

To all my friends and family. This year I am thankful the felon has left the White House. It feels we can all finally breath again. I am so happy his idea of a ballroom at the White House was a joke, and we can once again walk in Jackie Kennedy’s rose garden, and visit the beautiful East Wing. I am thankful the felon’s personal Goebbels, Stephen Miller, lost his job when the reality that he was a fascist was too much to take. It was wonderful to see the Supreme Court wake up and do their job once again. They stopped drinking the MAGA Kool-Aid and voided all the executive orders calling on museums to hide the history of Black Americans, women, and the LGBTQ community. They told the president he didn’t have the right to place tariffs, and that he couldn’t fire legally appointed members of commissions under the rubric of Congress’s control.

Then I am thankful the Congress began to do its job. That so many Republicans grew a set of balls and decided to challenge Speaker Mike ‘sycophant’ Johnson, reminding him they were an independent part of government, and didn’t need to rubber stamp everything the felon wanted. I was thankful to see them extend the SNAP program indefinitely, and the same with the tax credits for the ACA, agreeing to include these important programs in next year’s budget. Then they went further, and paid for the programs, by rescinding all the tax benefits they had given to the wealthy, and corporations, in the felon’s big ugly bill. Finally realizing it is the poor and middle class who they had to help if the country was to move forward. Then I can’t thank them enough for finally passing the Equality Act, and doing it with a veto proof majority, so the felon had to sign it, before he left office. They did the same for the Choice Act, and the Voting Rights Act. It was a glorious year with so much to be thankful for. 

Then I am so thankful Congress finally stood up to the felon and said he couldn’t start wars without their approval, and the Supreme Court ruled they were right. That attacking Venezuela was not something he had the right to do. Then the final thing the court did this year I am thankful for, is they actually modified their ruling on presidential immunity, and said the felon’s grifting was not covered, as under their decision that was private, and not done in his role as president. Again, can’t thank them enough for waking up and doing that. 

Then there is even more I am thankful for this year. It was so nice to see Tesla collapse, and Musk lose his trillion-dollar salary. The people finally woke up to him and insisted Congress mandate the satellite system he built, basically with money from the government, was actually owned by the government, and he could no longer control who can use it. It was determined he alone would not be able to tell Ukraine whether or not they can use it in their war defending against the Russian invasion. Then I am so thankful Congress went even further, and approved the funds needed by the Ukrainians for long-range missiles, and a missile defense system, accepting Ukraine was actually fighting a proxy war for the West, and Ukraine winning that war would help keep our own men and women off the battlefield. 

And speaking of our military, I thank Congress for lifting the ban on transgender persons in the military, and honoring their service, along with the service of women, Black service members, all members of the LGBTQ community, and all minorities. It was fun to see Pete Hegseth being led out of the Pentagon, and being reminded he wasn’t the Secretary of War. There is no Department of War, it is still the Department of Defense, with congressional oversight. Again, so many things to be thankful for this past year. It seemed like my heart runneth over. 

Then my alarm went off and I woke up from my big beautiful dream, only to realize I was still living in the Trumpian nightmare. 


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Elusive safety: what new global data reveals about gender, violence, and erasure

Movements against gender equality, lack of human rights data contributing factors.

Published

on

Activists who participated in a 2024 Pride march in San Salvador, El Salvador, carry a banner that calls for a country where “being a woman is not a danger.” (Photo courtesy of Colectivo Alejandría)

“My identity could be revealed, people can say whatever they want [online] without consequences. [Hormone replacement therapy] is illegal here so I’m just waiting to find a way to get out of here.”

-Anonymous respondent to the 2024 F&M Global Barometers LGBTQI+ Perception Index from Iraq, self-identified as a transgender woman and lesbian

As the campaign for 16 Days Against Gender-Based Violence begins, it is a reminder that gender-based violence (GBV) — both on– and offline — not only impacts women and girls but everyone who has been harmed or abused because of their gender or perceived gender. New research from the Franklin & Marshall (F&M) Global Barometers and its report A Growing Backlash: Quantifying the Experiences of LGBTQI+ People, 2022-2024 starkly show trends of declining safety among LGBTQI+ persons around the world.

This erosion of safety is accelerated by movements against gender equality and the disappearance of credible human rights data and reporting. The fight against GBV means understanding all people’s lived realities, including those of LGBTQI+ people, alongside the rights we continue to fight for.

We partnered together while at USAID and Franklin & Marshall College to expand the research and evidence base to better understand GBV against LGBTQI+ persons through the F&M Global Barometers. The collection of barometers tracks the legal rights and lived experiences of LGBTQI+ persons from 204 countries and territories from 2011 to the present. With more than a decade of data, it allows us to see how rights have progressed and receded as well as the gaps between legal protections and lived experiences of discrimination and violence. 

This year’s data reveals alarming trends that highlight how fear and violence are, at its root, gendered phenomena that affect anyone who transgresses traditional gender norms.

LGBTQI+ people feel less safe

Nearly two-thirds of countries experienced a decline in their score on the F&M Global Barometers LGBTQI+ Perception Index (GBPI) from 2022-2024. This represents a five percent drop in global safety scores in just two years. With almost 70 percent of countries receiving an “F” grade on the GBPI, this suggests a global crisis in actual human rights protections for LGBTQI+ people. 

Backsliding on LGBTQI+ human rights is happening everywhere, even in politically stable, established democracies with human rights protections for LGBTQI+ people. Countries in Western Europe and the Americas experienced the greatest negative GBPI score changes globally, 74 and 67 percent, respectively. Transgender people globally reported the highest likelihood of violence, while trans women and intersex people reported the highest levels of feeling very unsafe or unsafe simply because of who they are. 

Taboo of gender equality

Before this current administration dismantled USAID, I helped create an LGBTQI+ inclusive whole-of-government strategy to prevent and respond to GBV that highlighted the unique forms of GBV against LGBTQI+ persons. This included so-called ‘corrective’ rape related to actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression” and so-called ‘conversion’ therapy practices that seek to change or suppress a person’s gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, or sex characteristics. These efforts helped connect the dots in understanding that LGBTQI+ violence is rooted in the same systems of inequality and power imbalances as the broader spectrum of GBV against women and girls. 

Losing data and accountability

Data that helps better understand GBV against LGBTQI+ persons is also disappearing. Again, the dismantling of USAID meant a treasure trove of research and reports on LGBTQI+ rights have been lost. Earlier this year, the US Department of State removed LGBTQI+ reporting from its annual Human Rights Reports. These played a critical role in providing credible sources for civil society, researchers, and policymakers to track abuses and advocate for change. 

If violence isn’t documented, it’s easier for governments to deny it even exists and harder for us to hold governments accountable. Yet when systems of accountability work, governments and civil society can utilize data in international forums like the UN Universal Periodic Review, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Sustainable Development Goals to assess progress and compliance and call for governments to improve protections. 

All may not be lost if other countries and donors fill the void by supporting independent data collection and reporting efforts like the F&M Global Barometers and other academic and civil society monitoring. Such efforts are essential to the fight against GBV: The data helps show that the path toward safety, equality, and justice is within our reach if we’re unafraid of truth and visibility of those most marginalized and impacted.

Jay Gilliam (he/him/his) was the Senior LGBTQI+ Coordinator at USAID and is a member of the Global Outreach Advisory Council of the F&M Global Barometers.

Susan Dicklitch-Nelson (she/her/hers) is the founder of the F&M Global Barometers and Professor of Government at Franklin & Marshall College.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Second ‘lavender scare’ is harming our veterans. We know how to fix it

Out in National Security has built Trans Veterans State and Local Policy Toolkit

Published

on

(Photo by Cheryl Casey via Bigstock)

Seventy years after the first “lavender scare” drove LGBTQ Americans from public service, a second version is taking shape. Executive directives and administrative reviews have targeted transgender servicemembers and veterans, producing a new wave of quiet separations and lost benefits.

The policy language is technical, but the result is personal. Veterans who served honorably now face disrupted healthcare, delayed credentials, or housing barriers that no act of Congress ever required. Once again, Americans who met every standard of service are being told that their identity disqualifies them from stability.

Out in National Security built the Trans Veterans State and Local Policy Toolkit to change that. The toolkit gives state and local governments a practical path to repair harm through three measurable actions.

First, continuity of care. States can keep veterans covered by adopting presumptive Medicaid eligibility, aligning timelines with VA enrollment, and training providers in evidence-based gender-affirming care following the World Professional Association for Transgender Health Standards of Care Version 8.

Second, employment, and licensing. Governors and boards can recognize Department of Defense credentials, expedite licensing under existing reciprocity compacts, and ensure nondiscrimination in state veterans’ employment statutes.

Third, housing stability. States can designate transgender-veteran housing liaisons, expand voucher access, and enforce fair-housing protections that already exist in law.

Each step can be taken administratively within 90 days and requires no new federal legislation. The goal is straightforward: small, state-level reforms that yield rapid, measurable improvement in veterans’ daily lives.

The toolkit was introduced during a Veterans Week event hosted by the Center for American Progress, where federal and state leaders joined Out in National Security to highlight the first wave of state agencies adopting its recommendations. The discussion underscored how targeted, administrative reforms can strengthen veterans’ healthcare, employment, and housing outcomes without new legislation. Full materials and implementation resources are now available at outinnationalsecurity.org/public-policy/toolkit, developed in partnership with Minority Veterans of America, the Modern Military Association of America, SPARTA Pride, and the Human Rights Campaign.

These are technical fixes, but they carry moral weight. They reaffirm a basic democratic promise: service earns respect, not suspicion.

As a policy professional who has worked with veterans across the country, I see this moment as a test of civic integrity. The measure of a democracy is not only who it allows to serve but how it treats them afterward.

The second “lavender scare” will end when institutions at every level decide that inclusion is an obligation, not an exception. The toolkit offers a way to begin.

For more information or to access the toolkit once it is public, visit outinnationalsecurity.org/toolkit.

Lucas F. Schleusener is the CEO of Out in National Security.

Continue Reading

Popular