By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Project 2025, a detailed conservative agenda, presented a rare opportunity for accurate prediction but was instead met with journalistic surprise despite its public availability. While advocacy groups like the ACLU warned of the plan’s negative impacts, their concerns were often dismissed as partisan, whereas Trump’s denials, even when demonstrably false, were treated as newsworthy facts. This journalistic approach, prioritizing neutrality and minimizing the appearance of bias, ultimately allowed Trump’s lies to be laundered into legitimate disagreements, hindering voters from understanding the gravity of the situation. The failure to simply acknowledge the obvious – the existence of the document, its authors, Trump’s endorsements, and his lies – directly hampered the ability of the press to inform the public.
Read the original article here
The media malpractice that paved the way for Trumpism is a story of complicity, naivete, and a fundamental misunderstanding of the Republican Party’s trajectory. It’s a tragedy that unfolds with each election cycle, a recurring narrative where political journalists, knowingly or unknowingly, play a part in the erosion of American democracy. This isn’t a conspiracy, but rather a consequence of systemic issues within the media landscape.
One of the most glaring failures is the consistent unwillingness of many journalists to recognize, let alone report on, the predictable actions of the Republican Party. Instead of analyzing the GOP’s moves with a clear-eyed understanding of their underlying ideology, the media often treats each development as an isolated incident, a surprise, or a mere political maneuver. This approach allows the public to be constantly blindsided by the next shocking revelation, rather than being prepared for it. It’s like watching a horror movie where the characters repeatedly walk into the haunted house, despite all the obvious warning signs. The media, in this analogy, is the one holding the flashlight.
The constant need for “shocked Pikachu” moments is a symptom of this problem. News outlets thrive on drama, and the more sensational the story, the better. This creates a perverse incentive to present each new outrage as an unexpected event, even when the seeds of it were sown long ago. Project 2025, for example, a detailed blueprint for a conservative takeover of the government, was widely discussed and readily available. Yet, many in the media seemed to feign ignorance, treating the revelations of its contents as if they were brand new. This reluctance to connect the dots, to contextualize events within a broader framework, is a disservice to the public.
Profit-driven media, reliant on algorithms that prioritize engagement and outrage, exacerbates the problem. The pressure to generate clicks and views often trumps the commitment to truth and thoughtful analysis. This model rewards sensationalism and punishes nuanced reporting. It encourages the proliferation of “hot takes” over in-depth investigations, and it reinforces the idea that the audience is more interested in being entertained than informed. In such an environment, the focus shifts from informing the public to capturing their attention, even if it means sacrificing accuracy and critical thinking.
The ownership of the media by powerful financial interests further complicates the situation. When news outlets are controlled by billionaires, it’s difficult to maintain true independence and objectivity. The incentives are often aligned with protecting the status quo, even if that status quo is eroding democratic values. The constant need for access to the powerful also incentivizes keeping things down the middle, sacrificing the truth to protect access.
The emphasis on access journalism, where maintaining relationships with key figures takes precedence over holding them accountable, is another significant contributor to the problem. It leads to a situation where reporters are more concerned about getting an interview or securing a quote than they are about exposing wrongdoing or providing a full and accurate picture of events. This culture of access creates a situation where the media becomes a tool for managing perceptions rather than a check on power.
The media’s willingness to normalize or whitewash Republican actions is a particularly egregious form of malpractice. Often, instead of calling out blatant lies or dangerous rhetoric, journalists will present both sides of an issue as if they were equally valid, even when one side is demonstrably false or harmful. This creates a false equivalence, allowing dangerous ideas to gain traction and undermining the public’s ability to discern truth from falsehood.
The failure to connect the dots, to recognize the patterns of behavior, and to provide the public with the context they need to understand the threats facing the country is a profound betrayal of the media’s responsibility. It’s time for political journalists to stop pretending they don’t know what Republicans are going to do. They have the information. They have the resources. They have the ability to inform the public. The only question is whether they have the will. We need a news media that prioritizes truth, accountability, and the public good. We need a media that understands its role in a democracy and is willing to fight for it.