Trump’s Relations With the Media

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/07/opinion/trumps-relations-with-the-media.html

Version 0 of 1.

To the Editor:

We understand why Fox News feeds Donald Trump’s need for attention. We don’t understand why the rest of the mainstream media, as illustrated by “A Network vs. the President” (Business Day, July 6), which takes up more than half of the front page of the Times business section, continues to do so.

Coverage of his latest tweet, whatever that may be, or his most recent egregious behavior merely inspires Mr. Trump to continue his assault on those who may not agree with him.

We suggest that the only coverage that the responsible press should give to our tweeting president is coverage of policy statements made by members of his administration. No more repeating of tweets, insults to journalists, attacks on political rivals or coverage of campaign rallies, hotel openings or golf courses, and no attention to bold lies. Deny him what he craves most — the limelight and a platform for his personal animus.

DEBORAH B. BREZNAYJAMES W. BREZNAYNEW YORK

To the Editor:

Jim Rutenberg, who has been savaging President Trump for a year or so, says “the First Amendment is under near-daily assault,” but criticizes Mr. Trump when he exercises his right to free speech (“Celebrating Independence as Free Press Is Besieged,” Mediator column, July 3.)

Can Mr. Trump censor the press and stop its daily personal attacks? Its persistence proves the answer. You may despise Mr. Trump’s style of rebuttal, but the clash is a fair fight of free speakers. This article cites “some of our forebears,” including five presidents, defending free speech. But it ignores the fact that, from the earliest days, many of our politicians, including Thomas Jefferson, attacked a hostile press.

SAM SEGAL, ROCKVILLE, MD.

To the Editor:

The media needs to take a collective deep breath regarding the president and his anti-media tweets and video, none of which feature anything even remotely approximating a direct, explicit threat, physical or otherwise, to the fourth estate generally or to any its members specifically.

Further, just as the president needs to maintain a thick skin in order to do his job effectively, the same applies to those who cover him journalistically. In this ongoing battle, there is no denying that the media consistently gives as good as it gets.

MARK GODES, CHELSEA, MASS.

To the Editor:

Re “Remarks Draw Backlash That Unites a Normally Fractious News Media” (news article, June 30):

In defending President Trump’s indefensible remarks about Mika Brzezinski, his spokeswoman, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, said, “I don’t think you can expect someone to be personally attacked, day after day, minute by minute, and sit back.”

I see her point. Where could we possibly find an example of a president subject to scurrilous personal attacks who responds only with class and dignity? How far back in the history of the presidency would we have to go? Less than six months actually. His name was Barack Obama, and some of the most racist, unfounded attacks (birtherism) against him came from the same guy who’s whining now about how he’s being treated.

Miss the 44th president? I know I do.

JONATHAN ENGEL, NEW YORK

To the Editor:

If only all the media would ignore President Trump’s stupid tweets and all the cable and late-night hosts would stop talking about them, their impact would dissipate immediately. The president’s ridiculous video of his wrestling match with CNN and his attack on Mika Brzezinski don’t deserve the attention they received. What if he tweeted and nobody paid attention except his followers? This is the best solution.

Mr. Trump knows that these tweets distract everyone from the real enemy and critical issues like health care and climate change. This is just what Mr. Trump wants. Let’s frustrate him by ignoring him, which will drive him crazy.

BESS HEITNER, NEW YORK