Let me try a different way to go about this than my normal blunt fashion. Thank you, Gabe, for such an informative piece on the President’s so far successful attempts to exact revenge on certain media outlets and muzzle freedom of the press. Ugh, I can’t. “ … bipartisan attempts to turn journalistic errors into full-blown legal fights, through both defamation and consumer protection laws …” is complete baloney! Where is the analysis about how Fox News, Newsmax, OAN and their ilk completely lie on air every single day? All of their interview editing makes CBS’s Harris interview editing look like nothing. The actual judge in the sexual abuse case called it rape. If it had been Obama or Biden in that trial right wing media would have “rape” plastered everywhere, using the word 24/7. Good for Newsom, finally trying to hold Fox to account for its lies. It’s long overdue. But please don’t use the word bipartisan to describe it or say he’s taking a cue from Trump in going after the media. It’s two entirely different scenarios. What I’d rather see is an informative piece on the rampant lies, misinformation and disinformation being disseminated by right wing media and what can be done about it.
This is such an important thing for people to understand. Thanks Gabe!
Fellow Preamble readers, I highly recommend the podcast “Question Everything” where reporter Brian Reed is rethinking every aspect of being a journalist in this era.
One episode covers how the Sullivan Supreme Court case has had its defenders change their tune over time. We even have audio of Alan Dershowitz explaining a decade ago how much he loves the Sullivan case despite the fact that it meant him a great amount of pain in his personal life, because he believed in the principle of protecting journalism and the truth; that it is more important than protecting someone’s feelings, even when a reporter makes an honest mistake. But now, Dershowitz is attacking Sullivan.
There is a common thread between him and several of the others who are publicly denouncing the case – including Clarence Thomas and Donald Trump. They are powerful men credibly accused of sexual assault. Fascinating. Predictable. I wonder if P. Diddy has any critiques to add.
The whole Question Everything series is really vital to understanding the industry that helps us understand our world, and I cannot recommend it enough. Their 2-part episode “Who’s Behind the Raids? A Mystery in Marion” is maybe the best story about journalism itself that I have ever heard. It’s one of those stories where you are cheering the heroes all along, until you stop and think: if it took so much work and so much luck for justice to prevail, how many of these injustices are happening every day that we never hear about?
The very least we can do in this era is to support journalists who, like Sharon, have come under immense pressure to acquiesce to the powers that attack anyone that hold them accountable. That’s why I was a little disappointed by the reaction in the comments a week or so ago when people thought Elise’s piece about how the American people might be affected by a war in Iran wasn’t sufficiently focused on the human toll of people who live in the Middle East. That is a totally valid critique and I applaud people for speaking out when they find problems with reporting. The disappointing part was the name calling and canceling of subscriptions. We need to support journalists, even the ones that represent a point of view we disagree with. If we strip funding from a news organization just because they offer a POV that contradicts our worldview or taste, we are going to end up much less informed.
In a world where it’s becoming more and more popular to scapegoat and shoot the messenger, we need to be journalists’ cheerleaders if we want any hope of counteracting the intended chilling effect of these frivolous lawsuits.
That’s a pretty optimistic takeaway on some really negative trends toward a very obvious attack on our freedoms. I don’t believe you should even suggest this as a possible future benefit: it’s just pathetic and contrary to logical thinking. Parents and teachers, years ago, used to tell children who were victims of bullying that kids “picked in them because they really liked them and wanted their attention”. It was then and us now similarly, a lazy way of not addressing a problem, and somehow justifying its existence as acceptable.
Why, for example, rule against a party, and then stay the ruling so that an appeal can be prepared? This is not justice - at least it for ordinary people.
Let’s start assigning the correct label to this administration, these times and our “beloved” government. Let’s see ourselves as the rest of the world sees us and factually address the current times and happenings . What you don’t label and understand, you can’t change.
Trump is a bully. He’s always been a bully. None of the law suits he’s initiated against the media had any merit, and he would have lost. For an old man, with no morals, character or intelligence, he somehow has got the mainstream media scrambling. I don’t understand, given that he can’t run again, and the democrats are almost guaranteed a midterm blue wave. I think what we have to focus on is remembering that the mainstream media ( or the billionaire owners of the mainstream media) made a decision to appease the man that is actively destroying our country. To ignore their principles and give in to a sad and pathetic old man. The political tables will turn and when they do, we need to ignore them and go elsewhere for our news. Any journalist that has integrity will also leave these platforms and the ones that don’t are saying they agree that money is more important than morals and character.
Apparently, George Stephanopoulos's only mistake was not utilizing a FOX News tactic. Rather than stating that Trump was found "liable for rape," he should have said, "Some have described Trump's actions simply as 'rape'."
I don't comment much, but I feel like this has been a long-time coming. When our media outlets are being purchased by large public corporations with shareholders, who's interests are they going to protect first?
As a former journalism student, I refuse to let this be the be-all and end-all of "journalism". Substack and the rise of independent journalists/historians like Gabe, Sharon, Aaron and and the rest might just be what we've been looking for for some time. I choose to not lose hope. I choose to think there's a better way of getting our news than from CBS, ABC or the rest of 'em.
What I find even more frustrating is that our politicians and government spokespeople out right lie and mislead the public every single day and they are protected from us, their constituents, from suing them for it. We need a class action lawsuit suing all of the politicians that out right lie to us about what we are funding. 🤬
Who's going to sue the trump regime for lying to us every day? Johnson says "There are no Medicaid cuts in this bill.". Karoline Leavitt outright lies every time she gets behind a microphone. RFK Jr. consistently lies about vaccines. Hegseth lied about the signal chat information not being classified, and on and on. Trump pretending to care about the truth is laughable.
Really appreciated this piece, Gabe. I agree that when the media gets it wrong, it should be held accountable. But that doesn’t mean we should lose sight of how important a free press is, and your piece offered a fair warning about what’s at stake when lawsuits become a tool of politicians to go after journalism. Any framing that draws parallels across the aisle or offers even cautious optimism is sometimes met here with frustration and criticism (or what Timothy referenced, the name calling and subscription cancellation threats). I think there's value in taking a step back to consider how these dynamics can spiral more broadly, no matter who’s in charge. Glad to see this kind of reflection - it’s needed.
Let me try a different way to go about this than my normal blunt fashion. Thank you, Gabe, for such an informative piece on the President’s so far successful attempts to exact revenge on certain media outlets and muzzle freedom of the press. Ugh, I can’t. “ … bipartisan attempts to turn journalistic errors into full-blown legal fights, through both defamation and consumer protection laws …” is complete baloney! Where is the analysis about how Fox News, Newsmax, OAN and their ilk completely lie on air every single day? All of their interview editing makes CBS’s Harris interview editing look like nothing. The actual judge in the sexual abuse case called it rape. If it had been Obama or Biden in that trial right wing media would have “rape” plastered everywhere, using the word 24/7. Good for Newsom, finally trying to hold Fox to account for its lies. It’s long overdue. But please don’t use the word bipartisan to describe it or say he’s taking a cue from Trump in going after the media. It’s two entirely different scenarios. What I’d rather see is an informative piece on the rampant lies, misinformation and disinformation being disseminated by right wing media and what can be done about it.
Thank you, Kate.
When our rights are under attack, what do we do?
Stand up! Fight back!
This is such an important thing for people to understand. Thanks Gabe!
Fellow Preamble readers, I highly recommend the podcast “Question Everything” where reporter Brian Reed is rethinking every aspect of being a journalist in this era.
One episode covers how the Sullivan Supreme Court case has had its defenders change their tune over time. We even have audio of Alan Dershowitz explaining a decade ago how much he loves the Sullivan case despite the fact that it meant him a great amount of pain in his personal life, because he believed in the principle of protecting journalism and the truth; that it is more important than protecting someone’s feelings, even when a reporter makes an honest mistake. But now, Dershowitz is attacking Sullivan.
There is a common thread between him and several of the others who are publicly denouncing the case – including Clarence Thomas and Donald Trump. They are powerful men credibly accused of sexual assault. Fascinating. Predictable. I wonder if P. Diddy has any critiques to add.
The whole Question Everything series is really vital to understanding the industry that helps us understand our world, and I cannot recommend it enough. Their 2-part episode “Who’s Behind the Raids? A Mystery in Marion” is maybe the best story about journalism itself that I have ever heard. It’s one of those stories where you are cheering the heroes all along, until you stop and think: if it took so much work and so much luck for justice to prevail, how many of these injustices are happening every day that we never hear about?
The very least we can do in this era is to support journalists who, like Sharon, have come under immense pressure to acquiesce to the powers that attack anyone that hold them accountable. That’s why I was a little disappointed by the reaction in the comments a week or so ago when people thought Elise’s piece about how the American people might be affected by a war in Iran wasn’t sufficiently focused on the human toll of people who live in the Middle East. That is a totally valid critique and I applaud people for speaking out when they find problems with reporting. The disappointing part was the name calling and canceling of subscriptions. We need to support journalists, even the ones that represent a point of view we disagree with. If we strip funding from a news organization just because they offer a POV that contradicts our worldview or taste, we are going to end up much less informed.
In a world where it’s becoming more and more popular to scapegoat and shoot the messenger, we need to be journalists’ cheerleaders if we want any hope of counteracting the intended chilling effect of these frivolous lawsuits.
Thank you, Timothy.
Journalism Matters!
That’s a pretty optimistic takeaway on some really negative trends toward a very obvious attack on our freedoms. I don’t believe you should even suggest this as a possible future benefit: it’s just pathetic and contrary to logical thinking. Parents and teachers, years ago, used to tell children who were victims of bullying that kids “picked in them because they really liked them and wanted their attention”. It was then and us now similarly, a lazy way of not addressing a problem, and somehow justifying its existence as acceptable.
Why, for example, rule against a party, and then stay the ruling so that an appeal can be prepared? This is not justice - at least it for ordinary people.
Let’s start assigning the correct label to this administration, these times and our “beloved” government. Let’s see ourselves as the rest of the world sees us and factually address the current times and happenings . What you don’t label and understand, you can’t change.
Trump is a bully. He’s always been a bully. None of the law suits he’s initiated against the media had any merit, and he would have lost. For an old man, with no morals, character or intelligence, he somehow has got the mainstream media scrambling. I don’t understand, given that he can’t run again, and the democrats are almost guaranteed a midterm blue wave. I think what we have to focus on is remembering that the mainstream media ( or the billionaire owners of the mainstream media) made a decision to appease the man that is actively destroying our country. To ignore their principles and give in to a sad and pathetic old man. The political tables will turn and when they do, we need to ignore them and go elsewhere for our news. Any journalist that has integrity will also leave these platforms and the ones that don’t are saying they agree that money is more important than morals and character.
Apparently, George Stephanopoulos's only mistake was not utilizing a FOX News tactic. Rather than stating that Trump was found "liable for rape," he should have said, "Some have described Trump's actions simply as 'rape'."
Todd, that’s funny. Or like Trump always says, “people are saying…”
I don't comment much, but I feel like this has been a long-time coming. When our media outlets are being purchased by large public corporations with shareholders, who's interests are they going to protect first?
As a former journalism student, I refuse to let this be the be-all and end-all of "journalism". Substack and the rise of independent journalists/historians like Gabe, Sharon, Aaron and and the rest might just be what we've been looking for for some time. I choose to not lose hope. I choose to think there's a better way of getting our news than from CBS, ABC or the rest of 'em.
What I find even more frustrating is that our politicians and government spokespeople out right lie and mislead the public every single day and they are protected from us, their constituents, from suing them for it. We need a class action lawsuit suing all of the politicians that out right lie to us about what we are funding. 🤬
Who's going to sue the trump regime for lying to us every day? Johnson says "There are no Medicaid cuts in this bill.". Karoline Leavitt outright lies every time she gets behind a microphone. RFK Jr. consistently lies about vaccines. Hegseth lied about the signal chat information not being classified, and on and on. Trump pretending to care about the truth is laughable.
Really appreciated this piece, Gabe. I agree that when the media gets it wrong, it should be held accountable. But that doesn’t mean we should lose sight of how important a free press is, and your piece offered a fair warning about what’s at stake when lawsuits become a tool of politicians to go after journalism. Any framing that draws parallels across the aisle or offers even cautious optimism is sometimes met here with frustration and criticism (or what Timothy referenced, the name calling and subscription cancellation threats). I think there's value in taking a step back to consider how these dynamics can spiral more broadly, no matter who’s in charge. Glad to see this kind of reflection - it’s needed.
One can only hope 🙏🏽 and keep speaking up!