I'm aware of his comments. While one could argue that Trump should not have speculated on live television about treatments he didn't fully understand, it was counterproductive to interpret his remarks in the worst possible way. He clearly did not tell people to inject bleach, yet this claim continues to be repeated as fact.
More broadly, the media has often pushed misleading narratives, frequently assuming the worst possible interpretation of Trump's statements. From the start of his presidency, he was treated as an adversary, which has only deepened distrust in the media among conservatives. Many commenters here dismiss Trump voters as uneducated or misinformed—an inaccurate and oversimplified view—without considering the broader factors that led to this political divide.
I do agree that we shouldn't repeat oversimplified claims! If we repeat them often enough then people stop understanding the nuance or even questioning if the claim is fully accurate (see also: the claim that the White House named Kamala Harris the "border czar").
"From the start of his presidency, he was treated as an adversary, which has only deepened distrust in the media among conservatives."
I think it's a little more complicated than that, and blaming "the media" is a little too easy a cop-out. Donald Trump was pushing the Obama birth certificate conspiracy for years before he ever ran for President, and during his campaign for the presidency gave plenty of reasons for the press to fact-check his claims (as *all* candidates should expect), but by the time he assumed office he was already calling the press "the enemy of the people." Trump has never liked being challenged or disagreed with, and his insistence that he's only treating the media badly because they treated him badly is, with respect, the logic of a childish bully...or an abuser. He ran for and became the President, and he should be able to take that heat without stooping so low.
Trump likes to spin it as though he alone has been uniquely persecuted by the press, but plenty of Presidents before him (George W. Bush and Barack Obama to name two obvious examples) have been absolutely lambasted by the media without resorting to calling the press "the enemy" or using those criticisms to broadly delegitimize any media sources that criticized them. What's unfortunate is that, as you say, many Trump supporters no longer trust any media that is critical of Trump. Whether that makes them "uninformed" I could not tell you, but choosing to isolate in a preferred information ecosphere (either one that says the economy was in dire straits under Biden and that we had a 'wide open' border, or one that says Trump is a Russian asset and Elon Musk stole the election) is certainly not going to result in nuanced takes. We should all be wary of that impulse.
I'm not disputing that Trump has always been antagonistic toward the press. But if you examine network news coverage of him, the bias is undeniable. During his first term, his first 100 days in office received significantly more negative coverage than any of his predecessors. The 2024 election saw the most lopsided media coverage in modern history, with nearly all reporting on Trump being negative while Harris received overwhelmingly positive treatment.
Beyond just the coverage imbalance, the media has actively spread falsehoods. They pushed the claim that Trump told people to inject bleach, misrepresented his travel restrictions as a "Muslim ban," and perpetuated the "fine people" hoax. They falsely reported that tear gas was used to clear Lafayette Park for a Trump photo-op, spun COVID-19 travel bans as racist, and ran with the baseless "suckers and losers" story. Even minor incidents, like Trump’s koi pond feeding in Japan, were distorted to make him look foolish. And your own reference to the "border czar" coverage is misleading. The media initially branded Kamala Harris the "border czar" before walking it back when the border crisis worsened and the Trump campaign drew attention to it.
This isn’t about who lies more—Trump is certainly dishonest. But, like I said, many people here dismiss Trump voters as misinformed without ever acknowledging the complexities of why they distrust mainstream media in the first place. Restoring trust in the media is key to getting Trump voters to acknowledge his wrongdoings. When the press is consistently biased or misleading, it reinforces the belief that Trump is unfairly targeted, making his supporters more likely to dismiss legitimate criticism. A fair and accountable media would make it harder for Trump voters to ignore his faults while also rebuilding credibility with the broader public.
Literally everything you are listing happened, and the media was right to cover it. He did absolutely say there were 'fine people on both sides' in Charlottesville. The travel bans WERE racist and were targeted at specific groups, and Trump himself called certain countries '$h*t hole countries" - which is pretty racist in and of itself. Trump gets more bad coverage because of the things he does and the things he says. This constant insistence that everything be 'even' toward him is not the same as being fair. Fair is being honest about what he's doing and what he's saying, and if that is unflattering for him, so be it. If he wants to be portrayed in a better light, he should behave better, and do things well.
Can you show me where I insisted that coverage be even? The media has been objectively dishonest about Trump. If you refuse to see it, you're being willfully ignorant, and you can continue to feign confusion over how anyone supports Trump.
Your insistence it be even is implied in the assertion that he receives unfairly negative coverage without acknowledging that he brings that on himself by his actions. It’s not that I refuse to see anything it’s that I have eyes and I see how Trump behaves and I understand why its newsworthy.
Also, did *I* say I’m confused about why people support Trump? Because I’m not confused about why people support Trump. They like what he says and what he does. I don’t like what he says and what he does, and thus I understand and accept that people who like that kind of thing and I share massive value differences.
When negative coverage of Trump comes from taking his comments out of context and interpreting them in the worst possible light, it’s dishonest, not simply him bringing it upon himself as you suggest. I’ve argued that the mainstream media should work to regain public trust so that Trump voters feel more inclined to criticize him when necessary, but you seem to oppose this, instead redirecting the criticism back at Trump and his supporters.
I’ve also noticed several of your comments implying that you consider yourself morally superior to those who voted for Trump. What values do you hold that Trump voters don’t, especially considering there are countless reasons someone might have voted for him?
It’s not out of context. Nothing we have talked about was out of context. He said and did those things.
Whatever reasons someone voted for him, they had to overlook his comments about women, the fact that he spread misinformation about immigrants stealing peoples’ pets, January 6, and his felony convictions, among so many other things. Morally I am opposed to saying degrading things about women and suggesting sexual assault (“grab em…”), lying, attempting to subvert our government and encouraging violent actions. Anyone who can overlook that stuff isn’t in alignment with me morally. But I mean, you’re the one who said my morals are better so 🤷♀️
I am sorry that you feel it comes off morally superior. However, being able to overlook what I’ve outlined above simply does indicate a very different worldview than mine. I genuinely think it’s more respectful to acknowledge that instead of talking to Trump voters like they need to be educated or will come to “see the light.” Trump voters chose to vote very differently than I did, and because I voted my values, I have to respect that our values differ. If it seems that I believe my values are the better ones, I mean - of course I do. That’s why they are my values! But I assume Trump voters believe theirs are better, because why else would we make the choices we’ve made? (Unless of course they didn’t vote their values but I’m not going to accuse anyone of that.)
What is "the media" exactly? It's 2025, we have TONS of ways to get information now. Are you specifically referring to major cable news media? And if so, do you really think that everyone pays attention to them?
I can tell you that I have not watched "the news" since I tuned in to see what was happening on Jan 6 2021. Before that, years.
Many of us are capable of interpreting what Trump says without any outside help/opinions.
What other factors do you think have contributed to this political divide? Because I would agree that SOCIAL media has, but I have a feeling you did not mean that when you were referring to the media.
Thank you. I bet if anyone put out a poll about where most of us get our information, very little of it would be from those cable networks. I haven't watched "The News" since we cancelled our plan in 2012. Before that, my parents were always very good about watching a bit from every news program, so I was always conditioned to know that relying too heavily on one source is not the best approach.
You’re right, I was referring to the major news networks. I agree with your point that viewership has shifted significantly from 2016 to today. I’d argue that this shift is partly due to the growing distrust in the media over that period. I’d also agree that social media has played a major role in shaping public perception, often in detrimental ways.
I think the shift started happening long before 2016! Personally, I haven't subscribed to traditional cable in over 20 years now. I was probably early with that, but currently I don't know anyone my age or younger who has cable and regularly watches network news. I'm Gen X.
Not bleach specifically, but he floated the suggestion of injecting disinfectants: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177
I'm aware of his comments. While one could argue that Trump should not have speculated on live television about treatments he didn't fully understand, it was counterproductive to interpret his remarks in the worst possible way. He clearly did not tell people to inject bleach, yet this claim continues to be repeated as fact.
More broadly, the media has often pushed misleading narratives, frequently assuming the worst possible interpretation of Trump's statements. From the start of his presidency, he was treated as an adversary, which has only deepened distrust in the media among conservatives. Many commenters here dismiss Trump voters as uneducated or misinformed—an inaccurate and oversimplified view—without considering the broader factors that led to this political divide.
I do agree that we shouldn't repeat oversimplified claims! If we repeat them often enough then people stop understanding the nuance or even questioning if the claim is fully accurate (see also: the claim that the White House named Kamala Harris the "border czar").
"From the start of his presidency, he was treated as an adversary, which has only deepened distrust in the media among conservatives."
I think it's a little more complicated than that, and blaming "the media" is a little too easy a cop-out. Donald Trump was pushing the Obama birth certificate conspiracy for years before he ever ran for President, and during his campaign for the presidency gave plenty of reasons for the press to fact-check his claims (as *all* candidates should expect), but by the time he assumed office he was already calling the press "the enemy of the people." Trump has never liked being challenged or disagreed with, and his insistence that he's only treating the media badly because they treated him badly is, with respect, the logic of a childish bully...or an abuser. He ran for and became the President, and he should be able to take that heat without stooping so low.
Trump likes to spin it as though he alone has been uniquely persecuted by the press, but plenty of Presidents before him (George W. Bush and Barack Obama to name two obvious examples) have been absolutely lambasted by the media without resorting to calling the press "the enemy" or using those criticisms to broadly delegitimize any media sources that criticized them. What's unfortunate is that, as you say, many Trump supporters no longer trust any media that is critical of Trump. Whether that makes them "uninformed" I could not tell you, but choosing to isolate in a preferred information ecosphere (either one that says the economy was in dire straits under Biden and that we had a 'wide open' border, or one that says Trump is a Russian asset and Elon Musk stole the election) is certainly not going to result in nuanced takes. We should all be wary of that impulse.
Well said, Emily. People seem to forget that all of this began with HIS words and HIS behavior.
I'm not disputing that Trump has always been antagonistic toward the press. But if you examine network news coverage of him, the bias is undeniable. During his first term, his first 100 days in office received significantly more negative coverage than any of his predecessors. The 2024 election saw the most lopsided media coverage in modern history, with nearly all reporting on Trump being negative while Harris received overwhelmingly positive treatment.
Beyond just the coverage imbalance, the media has actively spread falsehoods. They pushed the claim that Trump told people to inject bleach, misrepresented his travel restrictions as a "Muslim ban," and perpetuated the "fine people" hoax. They falsely reported that tear gas was used to clear Lafayette Park for a Trump photo-op, spun COVID-19 travel bans as racist, and ran with the baseless "suckers and losers" story. Even minor incidents, like Trump’s koi pond feeding in Japan, were distorted to make him look foolish. And your own reference to the "border czar" coverage is misleading. The media initially branded Kamala Harris the "border czar" before walking it back when the border crisis worsened and the Trump campaign drew attention to it.
This isn’t about who lies more—Trump is certainly dishonest. But, like I said, many people here dismiss Trump voters as misinformed without ever acknowledging the complexities of why they distrust mainstream media in the first place. Restoring trust in the media is key to getting Trump voters to acknowledge his wrongdoings. When the press is consistently biased or misleading, it reinforces the belief that Trump is unfairly targeted, making his supporters more likely to dismiss legitimate criticism. A fair and accountable media would make it harder for Trump voters to ignore his faults while also rebuilding credibility with the broader public.
Literally everything you are listing happened, and the media was right to cover it. He did absolutely say there were 'fine people on both sides' in Charlottesville. The travel bans WERE racist and were targeted at specific groups, and Trump himself called certain countries '$h*t hole countries" - which is pretty racist in and of itself. Trump gets more bad coverage because of the things he does and the things he says. This constant insistence that everything be 'even' toward him is not the same as being fair. Fair is being honest about what he's doing and what he's saying, and if that is unflattering for him, so be it. If he wants to be portrayed in a better light, he should behave better, and do things well.
Can you show me where I insisted that coverage be even? The media has been objectively dishonest about Trump. If you refuse to see it, you're being willfully ignorant, and you can continue to feign confusion over how anyone supports Trump.
Your insistence it be even is implied in the assertion that he receives unfairly negative coverage without acknowledging that he brings that on himself by his actions. It’s not that I refuse to see anything it’s that I have eyes and I see how Trump behaves and I understand why its newsworthy.
Also, did *I* say I’m confused about why people support Trump? Because I’m not confused about why people support Trump. They like what he says and what he does. I don’t like what he says and what he does, and thus I understand and accept that people who like that kind of thing and I share massive value differences.
When negative coverage of Trump comes from taking his comments out of context and interpreting them in the worst possible light, it’s dishonest, not simply him bringing it upon himself as you suggest. I’ve argued that the mainstream media should work to regain public trust so that Trump voters feel more inclined to criticize him when necessary, but you seem to oppose this, instead redirecting the criticism back at Trump and his supporters.
I’ve also noticed several of your comments implying that you consider yourself morally superior to those who voted for Trump. What values do you hold that Trump voters don’t, especially considering there are countless reasons someone might have voted for him?
It’s not out of context. Nothing we have talked about was out of context. He said and did those things.
Whatever reasons someone voted for him, they had to overlook his comments about women, the fact that he spread misinformation about immigrants stealing peoples’ pets, January 6, and his felony convictions, among so many other things. Morally I am opposed to saying degrading things about women and suggesting sexual assault (“grab em…”), lying, attempting to subvert our government and encouraging violent actions. Anyone who can overlook that stuff isn’t in alignment with me morally. But I mean, you’re the one who said my morals are better so 🤷♀️
Hi Homer! Thank you for sharing your thoughts. It is so frustrating to hear the moral superiority in some of the comments here.
I am sorry that you feel it comes off morally superior. However, being able to overlook what I’ve outlined above simply does indicate a very different worldview than mine. I genuinely think it’s more respectful to acknowledge that instead of talking to Trump voters like they need to be educated or will come to “see the light.” Trump voters chose to vote very differently than I did, and because I voted my values, I have to respect that our values differ. If it seems that I believe my values are the better ones, I mean - of course I do. That’s why they are my values! But I assume Trump voters believe theirs are better, because why else would we make the choices we’ve made? (Unless of course they didn’t vote their values but I’m not going to accuse anyone of that.)
What is "the media" exactly? It's 2025, we have TONS of ways to get information now. Are you specifically referring to major cable news media? And if so, do you really think that everyone pays attention to them?
I can tell you that I have not watched "the news" since I tuned in to see what was happening on Jan 6 2021. Before that, years.
Many of us are capable of interpreting what Trump says without any outside help/opinions.
What other factors do you think have contributed to this political divide? Because I would agree that SOCIAL media has, but I have a feeling you did not mean that when you were referring to the media.
Thank you. I bet if anyone put out a poll about where most of us get our information, very little of it would be from those cable networks. I haven't watched "The News" since we cancelled our plan in 2012. Before that, my parents were always very good about watching a bit from every news program, so I was always conditioned to know that relying too heavily on one source is not the best approach.
You’re right, I was referring to the major news networks. I agree with your point that viewership has shifted significantly from 2016 to today. I’d argue that this shift is partly due to the growing distrust in the media over that period. I’d also agree that social media has played a major role in shaping public perception, often in detrimental ways.
I think the shift started happening long before 2016! Personally, I haven't subscribed to traditional cable in over 20 years now. I was probably early with that, but currently I don't know anyone my age or younger who has cable and regularly watches network news. I'm Gen X.