Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: Biden's polls aren't great. How much is the media's fault?

Published

on

Opinion: Biden's polls aren't great. How much is the media's fault?

Long before Fox News co-opted the phrase “fair and balanced” as its slogan, American media was striving to meet that standard. Unlike Faux News, which has since dropped those words as well as just about any pretense of aspiring to them, the mainstream media still does aspire — to a fault.

Opinion Columnist

Jackie Calmes

Jackie Calmes brings a critical eye to the national political scene. She has decades of experience covering the White House and Congress.

Advertisement

That was the case in 2016 with the excessive coverage of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for some State Department business, a performance that spawned numerous critical journalistic postmortems — and the meme “but her emails.” The media, obsessed with seeming fair to Donald Trump, sought to balance all the negative coverage he generated because of his lies, slurs and bigotry and turned Clinton’s email habits into a pseudo-scandal. In the end, that imbalance in harping on the matter was unfair to her.

The media seems to be at it again. The new “but her emails” is “but his age” — that is, President Biden’s age, though Trump is only three years and seven months younger.

The issue isn’t unwarranted. Both men are the oldest by far to seek the presidency, breaking the record they set in 2020.

What’s unwarranted is the barrage of “but Biden’s age” coverage unleashed since late last week, when a Republican special counsel coupled his finding that Biden shouldn’t face charges for keeping some classified material after his vice presidency with wholly improper quackery about the “elderly” president’s “diminished faculties.”

Advertisement

On Monday, media analyst Margaret Sullivan provided a rundown of some of the coverage. It’s “nothing short of journalistic malpractice,” she wrote, for the media to make Biden’s age “the overarching issue” of the 2024 campaign — especially against the aging and democracy-threatening Trump. According to the Popular Information newsletter, in the four days after the special counsel’s report, the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal published a combined 81 articles about Biden’s age and memory.

Memory lapses, lies, name mix-ups and gaffes by Trump, a man so addled that he thinks repeating “person, woman, man, camera, TV” proves otherwise, get far less journalistic examination. For one thing, the media is as inured as the public to Trump’s falsehoods and malevolence; it’s “white noise,” the Bulwark, a Never Trump news site, bemoaned this week. Even so, he piles up outrages that can’t be ignored — like prospectively inviting Russia to attack or “do whatever the hell” it wants against NATO allies.

And as the negative coverage of Trump adds up, the media seizes disproportionately on Biden’s foibles and fumbles as if to even the score.

That is just another form of the bothsides-ism long evident in journalism: the tendency — in the interest of being fair and balanced — toward reporting that suggests that both sides, both parties or both candidates should get equal measures of critical coverage, or are equally culpable in some regard. The result too often is false equivalence.

It’s worth reprising a caution to journalists from political scientists Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, in their 2012 book documenting that Republicans were more responsible than Democrats for the dysfunction and polarization in our politics: “A balanced treatment of an unbalanced phenomenon is a distortion of reality and a disservice to your consumers.”

Advertisement

Even the New York Times Pitchbot, an account on Twitter/X that mocks the media for just this bothsides tendency, couldn’t out-caricature the real thing on CNN. The satirist behind the account posted a photo of the network’s screen during a panel discussion. The chyron at bottom read, “Is Biden’s age now a bigger problem than Trump’s indictments?”

Some in the media have tried to explain why significantly more voters worry about Biden’s age and mental acuity than Trump’s. A poll by ABC News and Ipsos released on Sunday found that 86% of Americans say the president is too old for another term compared to 62% who say the same of Trump.

Among the reasons is the perception that Trump, while hardly physically fit, seems more energetic than Biden. Also, reporters talk a lot to Democrats, who as a party tend to overreact to unfavorable news, polls, whatever — “bedwetters,” as Obama officials used to bellyache. So you get stories like the one this week headlined “ ‘A nightmare’: Special counsel’s assessment of Biden’s mental fitness triggers Democratic panic.”

Republicans, on the other hand, typically give reporters nothing when it comes to the disgraced former president. They’re Trump toadies, obsequiously mute about his transgressions when they’re not actually defending him. Take Trump’s obscenity about abandoning NATO allies: “I couldn’t find a single sitting Republican that openly opposed what he said,” lamented former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a rare Republican who has opposed Trump. Kinzinger also said Trump’s ramblings were further evidence that he “is clearly in mental decline.”

One factor that’s missing from the media explanations for why Trump fares better than Biden on assessments of age and mental stability: the media’s own role. Might the polls be less bad for Biden if the coverage were different?

Advertisement

It was a Trump sycophant, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who back in 2016, when he was still second-guessing his support for Trump, warned that he, voters and the media would someday have “to justify how they fell into this trap.”

The unprincipled Rubio certainly has much to account for. So, too, does conservative media. As for mainstream media, it’s not too late in the election year to avoid the trap of bothsides-ing.

@jackiekcalmes

Advertisement

Politics

Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts

Published

on

Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order blocking U.S. courts from seizing Venezuelan oil revenues held in American Treasury accounts.

The order states that court action against the funds would undermine U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

President Donald Trump is pictured signing two executive orders on Sept. 19, 2025, establishing the “Trump Gold Card” and introducing a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas. He signed another executive order recently protecting oil revenue. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Advertisement

Trump signed the order on Friday, the same day that he met with nearly two dozen top oil and gas executives at the White House. 

The president said American energy companies will invest $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s “rotting” oil infrastructure and push production to record levels following the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

The U.S. has moved aggressively to take control of Venezuela’s oil future following the collapse of the Maduro regime.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Column: Some leaders will do anything to cling to positions of power

Published

on

Column: Some leaders will do anything to cling to positions of power

One of the most important political stories in American history — one that is particularly germane to our current, tumultuous time — unfolded in Los Angeles some 65 years ago.

Sen. John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, had just received his party’s nomination for president and in turn he shunned the desires of his most liberal supporters by choosing a conservative out of Texas as his running mate. He did so in large part to address concerns that his faith would somehow usurp his oath to uphold the Constitution. The last time the Democrats nominated a Catholic — New York Gov. Al Smith in 1928 — he lost in a landslide, so folks were more than a little jittery about Kennedy’s chances.

“I am fully aware of the fact that the Democratic Party, by nominating someone of my faith, has taken on what many regard as a new and hazardous risk,” Kennedy told the crowd at the Memorial Coliseum. “But I look at it this way: The Democratic Party has once again placed its confidence in the American people, and in their ability to render a free, fair judgment.”

The most important part of the story is what happened before Kennedy gave that acceptance speech.

While his faith made party leaders nervous, they were downright afraid of the impact a civil rights protest during the Democratic National Convention could have on November’s election. This was 1960. The year began with Black college students challenging segregation with lunch counter sit-ins across the Deep South, and by spring the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee had formed. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was not the organizer of the protest at the convention, but he planned to be there, guaranteeing media attention. To try to prevent this whole scene, the most powerful Black man in Congress was sent to stop him.

Advertisement

The Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was also a warrior for civil rights, but the House representative preferred the legislative approach, where backroom deals were quietly made and his power most concentrated. He and King wanted the same things for Black people. But Powell — who was first elected to Congress in 1944, the same year King enrolled at Morehouse College at the age of 15 — was threatened by the younger man’s growing influence. He was also concerned that his inability to stop the protest at the convention would harm his chance to become chairman of a House committee.

And so Powell — the son of a preacher, and himself a Baptist preacher in Harlem — told King that if he didn’t cancel, Powell would tell journalists a lie that King was having a homosexual affair with his mentor, Bayard Rustin. King stuck to his plan and led a protest — even though such a rumor would not only have harmed King, but also would have undermined the credibility of the entire civil rights movement. Remember, this was 1960. Before the March on Washington, before passage of the Voting Rights Act, before the dismantling of the very Jim Crow laws Powell had vowed to dismantle when first running for office.

That threat, my friends, is the most important part of the story.

It’s not that Powell didn’t want the best for the country. It’s just that he wanted to be seen as the one doing it and was willing to derail the good stemming from the civil rights movement to secure his own place in power. There have always been people willing to make such trade-offs. Sometimes they dress up their intentions with scriptures to make it more palatable; other times they play on our darkest fears. They do not care how many people get hurt in the process, even if it’s the same people they profess to care for.

That was true in Los Angeles in 1960.

Advertisement

That was true in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.

That is true in the streets of America today.

Whether we are talking about an older pastor who is threatened by the growing influence of a younger voice or a president clinging to office after losing an election: To remain king, some men are willing to burn the entire kingdom down.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting childcare funds to Democratic states over fraud concerns

Published

on

Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting childcare funds to Democratic states over fraud concerns

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A federal judge Friday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from stopping subsidies on childcare programs in five states, including Minnesota, amid allegations of fraud.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, a Biden appointee, didn’t rule on the legality of the funding freeze, but said the states had met the legal threshold to maintain the “status quo” on funding for at least two weeks while arguments continue.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns.

The programs include the Child Care and Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, and the Social Services Block Grant, all of which help needy families.

Advertisement

USDA IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDS ALL FEDERAL FUNDING TO MINNESOTA AMID FRAUD INVESTIGATION 

On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

“Families who rely on childcare and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose,” HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill said in a statement on Tuesday.

The states, which include California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, argued in court filings that the federal government didn’t have the legal right to end the funds and that the new policy is creating “operational chaos” in the states.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian at his nomination hearing in 2022.  (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Advertisement

In total, the states said they receive more than $10 billion in federal funding for the programs. 

HHS said it had “reason to believe” that the programs were offering funds to people in the country illegally.

‘TIP OF THE ICEBERG’: SENATE REPUBLICANS PRESS GOV WALZ OVER MINNESOTA FRAUD SCANDAL

The table above shows the five states and their social safety net funding for various programs which are being withheld by the Trump administration over allegations of fraud.  (AP Digital Embed)

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.”

Advertisement

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.” (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital has reached out to HHS for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending