In a news article written by CNN on March 5 titled "Trump's baseless wiretap claim," US President Donald Trump claims in his Twitter account that former president Barack Obama allegedly wiretapped his phone during last year's elections.
 |
| Cable News Network (CNN) |
The problem originates from the whole article itself wherein, instead of collecting information from both parties involved in an issue, the reporters were prejudiced and sensationalized the allegations coming from the US president's social media account yesterday, March 4.
It is unclear if the journalists went to the White House to confirm the substance of the allegations, or at least went to White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer or other members of the executive department close to Trump, as it was written that "The White House did not provide evidence to back up Trump's claim or explain the source of his information."
Instead, CNN indulged on the side of Obama by getting statements from former US officials under his administration.
On the other hand, CNN reporters referred to a "senior administration official in Washington" who said that Trump was infuriated by a story published in Breitbart.com where radio host Mark Levin claimed that Obama worked against Trump's presidential campaign and his administration.
It is unclear who the official was but a screenshot of Social Media Director Dan Scavino Jr.'s tweet, who posted a link to the article, appears below the string of paragraphs.
The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) Code of Ethics states that:
Seek Truth and Report It
- Identify sources clearly. The public is entitled to as much information as possible to judge the reliability and motivations of sources.
- Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.
- Boldly tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience. Seek sources whose voices we seldom hear.
Be Accountable and Transparent
- Explain ethical choices and processes to audiences. Encourage a civil dialogue with the public about journalistic practices, coverage, and news content.
If there was one thing that CNN did right, it was explaining the constitutional grounds and legal processes as to why President Trump's allegations are invalid.
First, the news agency responded in a knee-jerk reaction with every whim of the president in his social media account. It becomes detrimental to their credibility if they simply reported every wrong move of the president in each passing day without trying to extract a statement from his side.
Though knowing that CNN, a reputable news agency, may have already done that, they should have indicated whether the president refused to respond to their queries or if they have yet to receive an answer from him.
Second, they editorialized the article by adding the narrative that compared to other presidents who "have spoken prudently about sensitive matters to ensure that any claims they make are backed up by carefully vetted facts, Trump has instead maintained his pre-presidency style: one defined by unsubstantiated claims bellowed off the cuff or tweeted at odd hours of the day."
This truism is the foundation of the prejudice against the president. However, it is also the media's responsibility to be relentless at consistently trying to ask for Trump's thoughts instead of perpetuating it as a common theme behind his actions.
Trump's posts on his twitter account should not be considered as equivalent to a president's official statement to address criticism or issues.
©The Pink Merman
Pacific-Atlantis Mermen Journal
Read the Pink Merman's copyright and other reminders.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feedbacks and constructive criticisms are highly encouraged. Keep in mind, however, that this blog does not portray itself as a legitimate source of factual information like recognized news agencies but as an avenue to practice journalism.