World
2 months into Trump's second administration, the news industry faces challenges from all directions
NEW YORK (AP) — During the first Trump administration, the biggest concern for many journalists was labels. Would they, or their news outlet, be called “fake news” or an “enemy of the people” by a president and his supporters?
They now face a more assertive President Donald Trump. In two months, a blitz of action by the nation’s new administration — Trump, chapter two — has journalists on their heels.
Lawsuits. A newly aggressive Federal Communications Commission. An effort to control the press corps that covers the president, prompting legal action by The Associated Press. A gutted Voice of America. Public data stripped from websites. And attacks, amplified anew.
“It’s very clear what’s happening. The Trump administration is on a campaign to do everything it can to diminish and obstruct journalism in the United States,” said Bill Grueskin, a journalism professor at Columbia University.
“It’s really nothing like we saw in 2017,” he said. “Not that there weren’t efforts to discredit the press, and not that there weren’t things that the press did to discredit themselves.”
Trump supporters say an overdue course correction is in order
Supporters of the president suggest that an overdue correction is in order to reflect new ways that Americans get information and to counter overreach by reporters. Polls have revealed continued public dissatisfaction with journalists — something that has been bedeviling the industry for years.
Tension between presidents and the Fourth Estate is nothing new — an unsurprising clash between desires to control a message and to ask probing, sometimes impertinent questions. Despite the atmosphere, the Republican president talks to reporters much more often than many predecessors, including Democrat Joe Biden, who rarely gave interviews.
An early signal that times had changed came when the White House invited newcomers to press briefings, including podcasters and friendly media outlets. The AP was blocked from covering pool events in a dispute over Trump’s renaming of the Gulf of Mexico, setting off a flurry of First Amendment concerns among press advocates and leading the administration to assert that the White House, not the press, should determine who questions him.
Two months before the administration took office, former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, who served under Republican President George W. Bush, had urged that changes be made.
“It’s time to bring that (briefing) room in line with how readers and viewers consume the news in 2025,” Fleischer said in an interview. “They don’t get their news from The Washington Post, The New York Times and the three networks anymore. They get their news from a myriad of sources.”
In practice, some newcomers have refreshingly tried to shed light on issues important to conservatives, instead of hostile attempts to play “gotcha” by the mainstream media, Fleischer said. There were also softballs, like when the Ruthless podcast asked press secretary Karoline Leavitt if reporters who questioned border policy were “out of touch.” The conservative Real America’s Voice network tried to knock Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy off stride by asking why he wasn’t wearing a suit in the Oval Office.
While the White House Correspondents’ Association has protested the AP’s treatment and efforts to upend tradition, it has been largely toothless. For more extensive discussions, the president and his team generally favor interviews with outlets that speak to his supporters, like Fox News.
The Trump team’s rapid response efforts to fight the ‘fake media’
The White House has also established a “Rapid Response 47” account on X to disseminate its views and attack journalists or stories it objects to. The feed’s stated goals are supporting the president and “holding the Fake Media accountable.”
Leavitt, 27, hasn’t hesitated to go toe to toe with reporters, often with a smile, and Tik-Tok collects some of those moments.
“We know for a fact there have been lies that have been pushed by many legacy media outlets in this country about this president, and we will not accept that,” she said at her first press briefing. It stood in contrast to Trump’s 2017 press secretary, Sean Spicer, who got into an angry confrontation with the press about the size of the president’s inauguration crowd on his first day in the White House, and never truly recovered from it.
Showing the spread of the administration’s disciplined approach, the Defense Department also has a rapid response account that says it “fights fake news.” The Pentagon has evicted several news organizations from long-held office space, leading some reporters to worry about access to fast, reliable information during a military crisis.
“Strategically, he likes to use the press as a pawn — it is one of the institutions that he can demonize to make himself look good,” said Ron Fournier, a former Washington bureau chief for the AP.
Trump has active lawsuits going against news outlets that displease him, such as CBS News for the way “60 Minutes” edited an interview with 2024 election opponent, Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris, or The Des Moines Register, for what turned out to be an inaccurate pre-election poll of Iowa voters.
The new FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, has signaled an activist stance, with investigations open against CBS for the “60 Minutes” case, ABC News for how it fact-checked the Trump-Harris debate and NBC on whether it violated federal “equal time” provisions by bringing Harris onto “Saturday Night Live.”
Even with all the change, many newsrooms are confronting the challenge
Fleischer welcomes a newly aggressive attitude toward the press. He believes many journalists were more activists than reporters during Trump’s first term. He wondered why journalists were not more aggressive in determining whether Biden’s advancing age made him fit for the presidency.
“I think that the press is either in denial, or they acknowledge that they have lost the trust of the people but they won’t change or do anything about it,” he said. “They just don’t know how to do their jobs any differently.”
Press advocates worry about the intimidation factor of lawsuits and investigations, particularly on smaller newsrooms. What stories will go unreported simply because it’s not worth the potential hassle? “It has a very corrosive effect over time,” Grueskin said.
Worth watching, too, is a disconnect between newsrooms and the people who own them. Both the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post backed off endorsements of Harris last fall at the behest of the their owners, and Post owner Jeff Bezos attended Trump’s inauguration. When the Post announced a reorganization earlier this month, Leavitt took a shot: “It appears that the mainstream media, including the Post, is finally learning that having disdain for more than half the country who supports this president does not help you sell newspapers.”
Many newsrooms are notably not backing down from the challenge of covering the administration. “60 Minutes” has done several hard-hitting reports, the Atlantic has added staff and Wired is digging in to cover Elon Musk’s cost-cutting.
For their own industry, much of the news is grim. The future of Voice of America is in doubt, eliminating jobs and, its supporters fear, reducing the nation’s influence overseas. Cost-cutters are eyeing government subscriptions for news outlets, eliminating an income source. On a broader scale, there are worries about attacks on journalists’ legal protections against libel lawsuits.
“They’re pulling at every thread they can find, no matter how tenuous, to try and undermine credible news organizations,” Grueskin said.
It is well organized. It is coming from multiple directions.
And it has been only two months.
___
Associated Press writer Ali Swenson contributed to this report.
___
David Bauder writes about media for The Associated Press. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social
World
Pope Leo says remarks about world being ‘ravaged by a handful of tyrants’ were not aimed at Trump: report
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Pope Leo XIV said Saturday that remarks he made this week in which he said the “world is being ravaged by a handful of tyrants” were not directed at President Donald Trump, a report said.
The pope, speaking onboard a flight to Angola during his 10-day tour of Africa, said reporting about his comments “has not been accurate in all its aspects” and his speech “was prepared two weeks ago, well before the president ever commented on myself and on the message of peace that I am promoting,” according to Reuters.
The news outlet cited the pope as saying his comments were not aimed at Trump.
“As it happens, it was looked at as if I was trying to debate the president, which is not in my interest at all,” the pope reportedly said.
’60 MINUTES’ ACCUSED OF USING LEFT-LEANING CARDINALS TO BAIT TRUMP INTO FEUD WITH VATICAN
Pope Leo XIV answers journalists’ questions during his flight from Yaoundé, Cameroon, to Luanda, Angola, Saturday, April 18, 2026. (Luca Zennaro/Pool Photo via AP)
Vice President JD Vance later took to X to thank the pope for clearing the record.
“While the media narrative constantly gins up conflict — and yes, real disagreements have happened and will happen — the reality is often much more complicated,” Vance wrote. “Pope Leo preaches the gospel, as he should, and that will inevitably mean he offers his opinions on the moral issues of the day.
“The President — and the entire administration — work to apply those moral principles in a messy world,” he continued. “He will be in our prayers, and I hope that we’ll be in his.”
The vice president’s comments came days after he told Fox News’ Bret Baier on “Special Report” that it would be best for the Vatican to “stick to matters of morality.”
“Let the President of the United States stick to dictating American public policy,” Vance said Tuesday.
Trump last Sunday accused Pope Leo XIV of being “terrible” on foreign policy after the pontiff criticized the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.
“He talks about ‘fear’ of the Trump Administration, but doesn’t mention the FEAR that the Catholic Church, and all other Christian Organizations, had during COVID when they were arresting priests, ministers, and everybody else, for holding Church Services, even when going outside, and being ten and even twenty feet apart,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.
“I don’t want a Pope who thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon.”
POPE LEO SLAMS THOSE WHO ‘MANIPULATE RELIGION’ FOR MILITARY OR POLITICAL GAIN, TRUMP RESPONDS
Pope Leo XIV and President Donald Trump (Simone Risoluti/Vatican Media via Vatican Pool/Getty Images; Salwan Georges/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
During a speech in Cameroon on Thursday, the pope said, “We must make a decisive change of course — a true conversion — that will lead us in the opposite direction, onto a sustainable path rich in human fraternity.
“The world is being ravaged by a handful of tyrants, yet it is held together by a multitude of supportive brothers and sisters.
Pope Leo XIV speaks as he meets with the community of Bamenda at Saint Joseph’s Cathedral in Bamenda on the fourth day of an 11-day apostolic journey to Africa April 16, 2026. (Alberto Pizzoli/AFP via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic or political gain, dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth.”
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.
Fox News Digital’s Landon Mion contributed to this report.
World
Bulgaria votes in eighth election in five years
Bulgarians headed to the polls Sunday for the eighth time in five years, with anti-corruption candidate and former president Rumen Radev’s bloc tipped to win.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The European Union’s poorest member has been through a spate of governments since 2021, when large anti-graft rallies brought an end to the conservative government of long-time leader Boyko Borissov.
Eurostat data shows Bulgaria consistently ranks last in the EU by GDP per capita. In 2025, Bulgaria (along with Greece) was at 68% of the EU average.
Radev, who has advocated for renewing ties with Russia and opposes military aid to Ukraine, was president for nine years in the Balkan nation of 6.5 million people.
He stepped down in January to lead newly formed centre-left grouping Progressive Bulgaria, with opinion polls before Sunday’s vote suggesting the bloc could gain 35% of the vote.
The former air force general has said he wants to rid the country of its “oligarchic governance model”, and backed anti-corruption protests in late 2025 that brought down the latest conservative-backed government.
“I’m voting for change,” Decho Kostadinov, 57, told reporters after casting his ballot at a polling station in the capital, Sofia, adding corrupt politicians “should leave — they should take whatever they’ve stolen and get out of Bulgaria”.
Polls are forecasting a surge in voter participation, with more than 3.3 million Bulgarians expected to cast ballots according to the Bulgarian News Agency.
Voting will close at 1700 GMT, with exit polls expected immediately afterwards. Preliminary results are expected on Monday.
‘Preserve what we have’
Borissov’s pro-European GERB party is likely to come second, according to opinion polls, with around 20%, ahead of the liberal PP-DB.
“I’m voting to preserve what we have. We are a democratic country, we live well,” said Elena, an accountant of about 60, who did not give her full name, after casting her vote in Sofia.
Front-runner Radev has slammed the EU’s green energy policy, which he considers naive “in a world without rules”.
He also opposes any Bulgarian efforts to send arms to help Ukraine fight back Russia’s 2022 invasion, though he has said he would not use his country’s veto to block Brussels’ decisions.
Pushing for renewed ties with Russia, Radev denounced a 10-year defence agreement between Bulgaria and Ukraine signed last month – drawing fresh accusations from opponents of being too soft on Moscow.
The ex-president also stoked outrage online for screening images at his final campaign rally of his meetings with world leaders including Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
“We need to close ranks,” he told around 10,000 cheering supporters at the rally, presenting his party as a non-corrupt “alternative to the perverse cartel of old-style parties”.
Borissov, who headed the country virtually uninterrupted for close to a decade, has dismissed suggestions that Radev brings something “new”.
At a rally of his party earlier this week, he insisted GERB had “fulfilled the dreams of the 1990s” with such achievements as the country joining the eurozone this year.
‘No one to vote for’
Radev is aiming for an absolute majority in the 240-seat parliament.
A lack of trust in politics has affected voter turnout, which slumped to 39% in the last election in 2024.
But with Radev rallying voters, high turnout is expected this time, according to analyst Boryana Dimitrova from the Alpha Research polling institute.
Miglena Boyadjieva, a taxi driver of about 55, said she always votes, but the “problem is that there is no one to vote for”.
“You vote for one person and get others. The system has to change,” she told reporters.
Political parties have called on Bulgarians to show up for the polls, also to curb the impact of vote buying.
In recent weeks, police have seized more than one million euros in raids against vote buying in stepped-up operations.
They have also detained hundreds of people, including local councillors and mayors.
World
How Cheap Drones Are Changing Wars Like the Ones in Ukraine and Iran
A 3-D rendering of an Iranian Shahed-136 drone, a device with two triangle-shaped wings attached to a central fuselage. It has an engine the size of a small motorcycle’s and carries 110 pounds of explosives.
Engine the size of a small motorcycle’s
Carries 110 pounds of explosives
One of the biggest takeaways of the war with Iran is that it has proven itself to be a surprisingly capable adversary against the United States. In addition to its willingness to go on the offensive, Iran has forced the U.S. and its regional allies to confront the rise of cheap drones on the battlefield.
Iranian drones, made with commercial-grade technology, cost roughly $35,000 to produce. That is a fraction of the cost of the high-tech military interceptors sometimes used to shoot them down.
Cheap drones changed the war in Ukraine, and they have enabled Iranians to exploit a gap in American defense investments, which have historically prioritized accurate but expensive solutions.
Countering drones has been a major priority for the Pentagon for years, according to Michael C. Horowitz, who was a Pentagon official in the Biden administration. “But there has not been the impetus to scale a solution,” he said.
In just the first six days, the U.S. spent $11.3 billion on the war with Iran. The White House and Pentagon have not provided updated estimates, but the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, estimated in early April that the U.S. had spent approximately between $25 and $35 billion on the war, with interceptors driving much of the cost. Many missile defense experts also fear interceptor stockpiles are now running dangerously low.
Here is a breakdown of some of the ways the U.S. and its allies have countered Iran’s drones, and why it can be so costly.
Air-based strikes
In an ideal scenario, an early warning aircraft spots a drone when it is still several hundred miles out from a target, and a fighter jet, like an F-16, is dispatched from a military base. The F-16 can then use Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) II rockets to shoot a drone from about six miles away.
A 3-D rendering of an F-16 fighter jet firing an APKWS II rocket from under one wing. Two to three rockets are fired per drone, as per air defense protocol. Two APKWS II rockets and an hour of F-16 flight cost approximately $65,000, a little less than twice that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Two to three interceptors fired per drone
These types of defensive air patrols are cost-efficient, but haven’t always been available because of the vast scope of the conflict. Iran has also targeted early warning aircraft that the U.S. needs to detect a drone from that distance, according to NBC News.
The other option for detecting and shooting down drones is a variety of different ground-based detection systems, but these systems are all at a disadvantage, as their ability to spot low-flying drones is limited by the curvature of the earth.
Anti-drone defense systems
One ground-based defense system the U.S. and its allies have built specifically to counter drones at a shorter range is the Coyote. It can intercept drones up to around nine miles away.
A 3-D rendering of a Coyote Block 2 interceptor, which looks like a three-foot tube with small rockets at one end. Two Coyotes cost approximately $253,000 or about seven times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
The Coyote is significantly cheaper than many of the other ground-based defense systems available to the U.S. and its allies and historically effective at defending important assets. But despite being both effective and cost-efficient, relatively few Coyotes have been procured by the U.S. military in recent years.
When Iran-backed militias launched attacks on U.S. ground troops in the region in 2023 and 2024, there were so few Coyotes available that troops had to shuffle the systems between eight different bases in the region almost daily, according to a report from the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank.
Ship-based anti-missile defenses
Many of the longer-range ground-based defense systems the U.S. and its allies can use to combat drones are more expensive, as they are designed to shoot down aircraft and ballistic missiles, not drones. A Navy destroyer’s built-in radar system, for instance, can detect drones from 30 miles away and shoot it down with Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) interceptors. As in the air-based strikes, military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of the deck of a Navy destroyer firing an SM-2 missile from a built-in launcher, which looks like a 15-foot missile launching from a grid of openings on the ship’s surface. Two SM-2 missiles cost approximately $4.2 million, about 120 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
This misalignment between America’s defense systems and current warfighting tactics started after the Cold War, when the anticipated threats were fewer, faster, higher-end projectiles, not mass drone raids.
Iran often launches multiple Shahed-136 drones at a time, given their low price tag. The drones are also programmed with a destination before launch and can travel roughly 1,500 miles, putting targets all across the Middle East within reach.
“This category of lower-cost precision strike just didn’t exist at the time that most American air defenses were developed,” said Mr. Horowitz.
Ground-based anti-missile defenses
The Army’s standard air-defense system is the Patriot. Typically stationed at a military base, it can shoot down a drone from up to around 27 miles away with PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement interceptors. Military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of a Patriot launcher loaded with 17-foot PAC-3 MSE missiles, which looks like a tilted shipping container with scaffolding. Two PAC-3 MSE missiles cost approximately $8 million, about 220 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Patriot missile defense system
Air defense training teaches service members to prioritize using longer-range defense systems first to “get as many bites at the apple as you can,” but those are the most expensive, said Stacie Pettyjohn, a senior fellow and director of the defense program at the Center for a New American Security.
But a costly defense can still make economic sense to protect a valuable target, especially those that are difficult to repair or replace, such as the nearly $1.1 billion radar at a military base in Qatar and the $500 million air defense sensor at a base in Jordan that were damaged early in the conflict.
Ground-based guns
Finally, there is what one might call a last resort: a ground-based gun. When a drone is about a mile away or less than a minute from hitting its target, something like the Centurion C-RAM can begin rapidly firing to take down the drone.
A 3-D rendering of a Centurion C-RAM, which looks like a gun mounted to a rotating, cylindrical stand. The gun fires 75 rounds of ammunition per second. Five seconds of firing the gun costs $30,000, slightly less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Centurion Counter-Rocket, Artillery and Mortar
Fires 375 rounds of ammunition in 5 seconds
Even though it is fairly cost-effective, the Centurion C-RAM is not the best option because it has such a short range.
Interceptor drones
There’s also what one might call the future of fighting drones: A.I.-powered interceptor drones. Interceptor drones like the Merops Surveyor can theoretically hunt and take down enemy projectiles from a short range.
A 3-D rendering of a Surveyor drone, which looks like a three-foot tube with wings and a tail. The Merops drone costs approximately $30,000, a little less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Merops system: Surveyor drone
Eric Schmidt, the former Google chief executive, founded a company to develop the Merops counter-drone system in conjunction with Ukrainian fighters, who have already been combatting Iranian drones in the war with Russia for years.
The U.S. sent thousands of Merops units to the Middle East after the conflict began, but it is unclear whether they have been deployed. The military set up training on the system in the middle of the war, as reported by Business Insider.
Other attempts to lower the cost-per-shot ratio of taking out a drone have failed.
The Pentagon invested over a billion dollars in fiscal year 2024 researching directed energy weapons, or lasers, that would cost only $3 per shot and have a range of 12 miles. Those systems have yet to be used in the field.
Despite the cost imbalance, the real fear for many in the defense community is the depleted stockpile of munitions.
“What scares me is that we will run out of these things,” said Tom Karako, the director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “Not that we can’t afford them, but that we’ll run out before we can replace them.”
-
Minnesota4 minutes agoVikings Have a Dubious Connection to the Dexter Lawrence Trade
-
Mississippi10 minutes agoMississippi College Baseball Wins Series vs. West Florida for First Time
-
Missouri16 minutes agoIt’s All Madsen In Missouri High Limit Tilt – SPEED SPORT
-
Montana22 minutes agoRural Highway Stalker In White Pickup With Dark Windows Terrifying Montana Women
-
Nebraska28 minutes agoScouting Future Saints: Nebraska Cornhuskers RB Emmett Johnson
-
Nevada34 minutes agoNevada high school football head coach steps down
-
New Hampshire40 minutes ago‘Not cosmetic’: NH lawmaker wants state to cover GLP-1 drugs for weight loss – Concord Monitor
-
New Jersey46 minutes agoThe Maple House Is Planning To Open In Two Locations In New Jersey This Year