Traditionally, included among the responsibilities of any U.S. president is communicating regularly with the American public about what he’s thinking, doing, and how he plans to proceed in the future.
And while some presidents have had tenuous relationships with certain reporters or publications, they have not gone to the extreme that the current chief administrator recently chose, banning the press from the White House.
While First Amendment experts say his action is unconstitutional, that hasn’t stopped the president from ignoring traditions, the law, or established precedents and following his own whims. Still, it’s hard to believe the president banned CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House, and denied them access in retaliation, allegedly, to how they have reported the news about him.
All three news organizations have since taken legal action to defend the rights of their reporters and will presumably be vindicated in court, if things follow a similar effort which failed during his first term in office.
But what was the president’s justification for taking such steps?
The president, in his announcement, did not cite any story in particular. However, he did blast the “fake news” – a term he has used repeatedly in efforts to discount or deflect unfavorable coverage by the press.
One potential outcome for which the president’s ban clears the path for the future could not be overlooked by a spokesperson for the Associated Press.
“The implications extend beyond these organizations: a standard used to exclude one news outlet because of its coverage could be applied to any outlet in the future,” the association said in a statement that called on the Trump administration to “immediately restore our colleagues’ access.”
In summary, this is a violation of the First Amendment because it counts as a blatant attempt by the federal government to decide what can or cannot be published by reporters and the press, and who has access to information.
These actions violate the law and the Constitution, and, in an ironic twist of fate, is hauntingly familiar to what the Black Press has endured for centuries: denied access and exclusion from the table, the boardroom – even the White House.
In fact, the reason that the Black Press was first established by the Rev. Samuel Cornish and John Russwurm on March 16, 1827, was to counter the misrepresentation and exclusion of Black Americans in the mainstream media.
“We wish to plead our own cause,” the two publishers said as they formed the first Black-owned and operated newspaper, “Freedom’s Journal,” in New York City.
That’s not to say there haven’t been brave and even barrier breaking African American reporters who have worked for the Black Press and eventually gained access to the White House. There was Harry McAlpin, the first Black reporter to attend a White House press briefing in February 1944. Then there’s Ethel Payne, the first Black woman included in the White House Press corps in the early 1950s.
However, even when denied access, the Black Press worked to get the story and empower communities through reporting. The same will happen with the outlets banned from the White House.
As CNN, MS NOW, and Politico seek legal action against this attack on the First Amendment, it’s also time to advocate for more equitable White House access to all journalists – from mainstream media to the Black Press.
