Commentary

America Decides: Free Press Or Trump's 4,229 'False Or Misleading Claims'

It's not something a British journalist would do lightly, but as The Guardian points out today, press freedom is far too important a principle to draw geographic boundaries around the principle -- particularly when we're dealing with the UK's strongest international ally, run by arguably the most powerful politician in the world.

There should be all the usual caveats mentioned beforehand that the UK is by no means a paragon of political virtue, nor is press freedom always exercised in the public good. One need only think of the Daily Mail's outrageous headlines as it named the judges who had applied UK law to the Brexit decision and so were labelled traitors. More recently, the BBC had to take it on the chin as it received a fine for wrongly naming pop icon Sir Cliff Richard being involved in an accusation of historic sex abuse, although he was never charged and nothing came of the allegation.

The UK press is not beyond reproach, and neither are politicians. However, I think The Guardian today sums up the feeling of all in the media, and many observers too. Politicians have often criticised individual papers or journalists for stories they disagree with. I can't think of any other living political figure who has declared a war on the media in the way Trump has, labelling it "the enemy of the people."

From this side of the Atlantic, it's all very baffling. In fact, it's nearly as baffling as the guy who got fewer votes in a two horse race being named the winner -- why not just count the votes and the person with the most gets the job? And then why give a President, who could potentially face incredibly serious accusations, a say in picking judges and those who run a law enforcement agency such as the FBI. Politicians picking members of the judiciary and police heads, who may be called on to judge or investigate, is behaviour that is truly puzzling. 

The UK is no angel, but this blurring of the lines between the executive, the courts and law enforcement would be a cause for concern here.

I know -- England gave the world cricket and so is not in a place to give lectures on simplicity and transparency, but the UK, like the US, is a proud defender of press freedom. 

So, let's take the front foot on this. Let's acknowledge first that Trump has been changing his line of "no collusion" regarding a potential meeting with Russian interests to not knowing whether anything happened "to the best of my knowledge." Let's also acknowledge that Trump is currently trying to negotiate the terms of an interview by Mueller and his team over the affair as we, separately, all wonder whether a tape of the "N" word being used will surface.

Let's move on instead and look at where the real fake news is coming from. The Washington Post is keeping count of Trump's "false and misleading claims." It most recently reported that there had been 4,229 in just 558 days, up to the end of July. This equates to 7.6 "Trump claims" per day compared to just 4.9 in his first 100 days in office. The misleading interpretations of the truth, that do not stand up to scrutiny, are accelerating.

Nobody will ever forget the anger the President showed when clear pictorial evidence showed that he was being liberal with the truth in claiming the turnout for his inauguration rivalled President Obama's. One of the most recent claims that will make the Washington Post count when August is tallied up, is with regard to statistics on an improvement in the job opportunity prospects for black Americans under his Presidency compared to Obama's. The quoted figures were so far off that his beleaguered press secretary was forced to give out the correct, and far less flattering, numbers

We could talk about ripping up the Paris Climate Agreement, Iran, picking a trade fight with the EU, and China, imposing travel restrictions on certain countries, placing children of illegal migrants in cages and many other issues that have shocked the UK. We may agree with Trump on some of these acts, and disagree on others.

More to the point, though, when it comes to his actions and demeanour, I would wager that any potential Prime Minister in the UK who made remarks against a female rival, as Trump did about Hillary Clinton's appearance, would never have progressed. I'd repeat that same claim once that "jock talk" audio tape was released about where Trump feels as a celebrity he is allowed to grab women. 

But let's move on from a different take on what we require from a leader, and what we are prepared to put up with. Let's stick with where the fake news is coming from. The Washington Post figures show that it's a pretty one-sided competition if we're comparing who puts out the most misleading information. There may be a few headlines that exaggerate or stories he doesn't agree with, but when Trump calls out the media, he really ought to factor in his own 4,229 "misleading" claims.

As the US press considers how it will react to the Boston Globe calling for today to be the day of opposing the "enemy of the people" slur, this statistic really ought to be brought to the fore. And here ends a rare incursion from me into American politics. 

For a bit of light relief to sign off on, I think we can presume Fox News will not number among the near 350 US media outlets countering "the enemy of the people" slur today. If you want to have a very loud "lol" moment, check out this video from a Danish politician tearing apart a piece to camera from Fox News on how Denmark is going the way of Venezuela. Trust me, it's hilarious. 

Next story loading loading..