Donald Trump’s animosity toward the media stems from its power to scrutinize and fact-check his words and policies. By labeling the media “fake news,” he aimed to undermine its credibility, especially among his supporters. This tactic has contributed to a polarized view of the press, where millions distrust established news outlets. The media, in turn, has often been forced to defend its role, complicating its ability to function objectively.

The State of Today’s Mainstream Media and Its Effect on Elections

As we learned in part 1, media fragmentation has made it challenging for voters to access unbiased, fact-checked information, which is crucial for free and fair elections. Corporate ownership, partisan coverage, and social media influence have created an environment where misinformation thrives.

This environment has eroded the trust essential for media to function as the Fourth Estate effectively. In many ways, the current media landscape risks informed voting, as echo chambers and disinformation skew perceptions and, ultimately, influence election outcomes.

When citizens lose trust in the press, the impacts on democracy are profound and far-reaching:

Erosion of Informed Decision-Making

A well-functioning democracy relies on an informed citizenry. When people don’t trust the press, they’re less likely to believe crucial information about policies, candidates, or government actions.

This undermines their ability to make informed choices, weakening democratic participation and accountability. Instead of basing decisions on well-researched facts, citizens may rely on rumors, disinformation, or echo chambers that reinforce biases, making it harder to unite on common issues.

Increased Vulnerability to Disinformation

Distrust in credible media opens the door for disinformation and propaganda, especially from partisan or foreign sources looking to manipulate public opinion.

Without trusted sources to clarify truth from lies, citizens may struggle to differentiate accurate information from falsehoods. This can lead to confusion, divisiveness, and susceptibility to manipulative narratives, allowing bad actors to exploit these divisions to their advantage.

Undermining Government Accountability

The press traditionally acts as a watchdog, exposing corruption, abuses of power, and government inefficiencies. When citizens don’t trust the media, the power of journalism to check authority diminishes.

Politicians and powerful entities, less fearful of media scrutiny, may feel emboldened to act with less transparency or accountability. This unchecked power weakens democratic institutions, as elected officials and organizations are no longer held to the same standards by a skeptical public.

Weakening of Civil Discourse

Trust in the media provides a shared set of facts that fosters constructive debate and civil discourse.

Without this foundation, disagreements are more likely to devolve into heated conflicts, as people lack reliable information as a basis for discussion. In this environment, polarization grows, with individuals retreating into ideological silos, convinced the “other side” is being misled or deceived.

Increased Political Polarization

Distrust in the press often leads people to seek information from sources that confirm their pre-existing beliefs, intensifying polarization.

When media skepticism drives people to turn solely to partisan outlets or social media echo chambers, it entrenches divisions, making consensus-building and bipartisan problem-solving more difficult. This intensifies political divides, making it challenging to address national issues collaboratively.

A Democracy Where Citizens Distrust the Press is at Risk of Losing its Integrity

Without a trusted Fourth Estate, the principles of transparency, accountability, and informed debate that sustain democracy are compromised, leaving society vulnerable to authoritarian tendencies and internal fragmentation.

For democracy to thrive, restoring public confidence in the press is essential, ensuring that the media can once again fulfill its role as an unbiased, truthful arbiter of information.

Donald Trump’s relationship with the media has been hostile.

His strategic use of anti-media rhetoric energizes his base and undermines critical coverage. Early in his political career, Trump labeled the press as “fake news,” dismissing coverage that he considered unfavorable or critical.

This language departed from the standard political response to media criticism and set a precedent for openly attacking journalists and news outlets. Trump’s relentless targeting of major media networks, particularly those that report on his policies and actions critically, has cast the press as an enemy of his administration and, by extension, an enemy of the people.

This antagonism has gone beyond rhetoric.

Trump repeatedly hints at regulatory changes to penalize or even silence news organizations that challenge him. For instance, he has suggested that networks could lose their licenses or face other forms of government retribution for perceived bias or misinformation.

This rhetoric has emboldened his supporters to distrust and criticize mainstream news, intensifying the broader distrust in the media. This tactic effectively undermines one of democracy’s essential pillars by suggesting that only media favorable to Trump can be trusted, limiting the public’s access to diverse and critical viewpoints.

Trump’s Threat to Sue CBS: A Harbinger of Future Assaults on the Media

Recently, Trump has escalated his attacks on the press by advocating for the revocation of CBS’s broadcasting license due to their perceived bias in editing interviews.

This marks a significant shift, as it openly suggests the weaponization of regulatory powers to control media content—a tactic often used in authoritarian regimes to censor opposition. By calling on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to target CBS, Trump signals a willingness to dismantle free press protections, using government influence to silence critics. The FCC traditionally oversees license allocation based on operational criteria rather than content regulation. Yet, Trump’s comments foreshadow potential abuses of executive power if re-elected.

This approach sends a chilling signal: mainstream media could face serious repercussions for critical reporting under Trump.

Such actions set a dangerous precedent, suggesting he will weaponize regulatory agencies to stifle press freedom and penalize dissenting voices. The implications are profound, hinting at a future where journalistic independence is compromised and media organizations are pressured to conform to government-approved narratives.

Should this trend continue, it could severely curtail the role of the Fourth Estate, creating an environment where public access to unbiased information is at risk—a cornerstone necessary for informed voting and a functional democracy.

Four Times Trump Went Too Far and Overtly Targeted the Media

Here are four notable examples of Trump’s adversarial actions toward the press and individual reporters:

Calling the Press “The Enemy of the People”
Throughout his presidency, Trump frequently referred to the press as “the enemy of the people,” a term with roots in authoritarian rhetoric. By labeling the press this way, Trump delegitimized critical coverage and positioned journalists as opponents of American values. This phrase fueled animosity towards the media, leading to harassment and even threats of violence against journalists, especially those who covered him critically.

Revoking CNN’s Jim Acosta’s White House Press Pass
In November 2018, after CNN reporter Jim Acosta engaged in a tense exchange with Trump during a press briefing, the White House revoked Acosta’s press credentials. The administration claimed that Acosta had been overly aggressive, though video evidence suggested otherwise. This unprecedented move was condemned by journalists and First Amendment advocates, who saw it as an attempt to limit press freedom. CNN filed a lawsuit, and a federal judge ordered the White House to reinstate Acosta’s pass, emphasizing the importance of a free press and access to the administration.

Mocking a Disabled Reporter
In 2015, Trump mocked New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski, who has a physical disability, after Kovaleski disputed Trump’s claim about witnessing “thousands” of Muslims celebrating in New Jersey after 9/11. Trump’s onstage imitation of Kovaleski, complete with exaggerated hand gestures, was widely condemned and highlighted his willingness to attack individual journalists personally and viciously, especially those who contradicted his statements.

Calling for the Revocation of NBC and Other Networks’ Licenses
After negative coverage of his administration, Trump suggested that NBC and other networks should have their broadcast licenses revoked. He tweeted about the “Fake News Network” and called for the FCC to investigate revoking licenses, which sparked concerns about the use of government power to silence critics. This tactic was reminiscent of authoritarian moves to control the press by threatening legal consequences for dissent, raising alarm about Trump’s willingness to undermine First Amendment protections​.

We Need to Stand Up for the Fourth Estate to Protect Democracy

The Fourth Estate remains vital for democracy, but its evolution—and the challenges of today’s landscape—show why an informed, critical, and media-savvy public is more essential than ever. For democracy to flourish, citizens must discern truth from manipulation, pushing for media accountability and recognizing that a free press is a cornerstone of free elections.