By John Dineen
Barton Gellman’s riveting piece in the January/February Atlantic — “Trump’s next coup has already begun” — caused quite a stir when it went online in December. It was the talk of Washington for at least a week.
But inevitably the crowd, and the journalists who try to command their attention, move on.
Nonetheless, as the House January 6th Committee continues its work, more news organizations are at least nodding in the direction of covering the growing threats to American democracy.
The Associated Press last week announced the appointment of a democracy news editor. That follows the New York Times announcement in April of personnel moves in preparation for the mid-term elections in the fall, saying the politics desk had “retooled to cover the emboldened political right and the growing questions about the future of American democracy.”
It’s good news if the announcements mean those organizations will connect the dots in their political coverage, making sure their daily journalism provides the context of the nation’s well-documented slide away from its traditional democratic values. It’s less valuable if it means a rehash of the well-worn “partisan divide” framework. (“Common ground? Democrats and Republicans don’t agree on much, but everyone seems to love pickle ball.”)
I should be used to PR-speak, but the breathless tone of the announcement — Maggie Haberman “will write sharp, news-breaking enterprise that exposes the motivations, rivalries and passions driving American politics” — reads like a blurb for a new politics-romance Netflix series.
The Times leadership has routinely dismissed criticism of its journalism, so it’s difficult to know if the mention of “the future of American democracy” represents genuine rethinking or empty rhetoric.
Media critic Dan Froomkin isn’t convinced:
"The article by 'Democracy Team' reporters Reid J. Epstein and Nick Corasaniti headlined, 'Far-Right Republicans Press Closer to Power Over Future Elections,' in Thursday’s Times, which ran on page A18, was pretty chilling stuff. Followers of Donald Trump’s lies 'threaten to upset the country’s democratic order,' they wrote.
"But on Sunday’s front page – much better real estate – the Times ran a morally, legally, intellectually, and politically bankrupt article headlined, 'Despite Growing Evidence, a Prosecution of Trump Would Face Challenges,' making the absurd argument that because Trump lies so much, it would be hard to convict him of pretty much anything."
Fairness dictates we wait and see — the AP and Times have formidable resources at their disposal — but it’s probably best to remember neither newsroom is in the business of being a democracy toolkit; their mandate is getting and holding our attention. For the Times, that could be recipes, Wordle, or democracy.
(One Dog Barking is an occasional column by my husband, John Dineen. He is a former senior congressional staffer and media executive and founder of briefing.center, a news and information service.)
Comments