The White House's recent decision to dictate which news outlets can cover President Trump represents a significant departure from over a century of tradition. Traditionally, a diverse pool of journalists provide coverage to ensure accountability and transparency. Officials like press secretary Karoline Leavitt describe this change as a modernization of press access to include streaming services, but many free speech advocates warn that it undermines democratic principles. Significant First Amendment implications arise as the administration gains control over which journalists cover the presidency closely, raising alarms among media experts.
Free speech advocates expressed alarm over the unprecedented decision by the White House to control which news outlets can access coverage of President Trump.
Leavitt argued the changes are a modernization of the press pool, suggesting they aim to be more inclusive and restore access back to the American people.
The move marks a significant shift in democratic practice, with the White House press team gaining power to determine who gets privileged access to Presidential events.
Media experts suggest that this shift raises critical First Amendment concerns as it allows the president to select his own reporters.
Collection
[
|
...
]