A presidential election is a busy time for news organizations as they provide coverage of the campaign trail leading up to election day and the aftermath.
Certainly news plays an essential role during this event as Americans tune in and primarily rely on journalists to attain information about candidates and their policies.
However, this election year proved to be a setback for American journalism. As Election Day approached, numerous news outlets projected Hillary Clinton would win the election. The public was so assured by the media after months of coverage that when the actual results began to develop everyone was left shocked.
The seemingly impossible had happened.
Donald J. Trump had won the presidency.
How could this have happened and why did nobody see this coming? What went wrong? These were the questions among many Americans that night who had relied on the information provided by the news sources.
On June 16, 2015, Trump first announced he would be running for change promising to make America great again. He immediately caught the attention of news organizations not only because of his celebrity status but his controversial comments in which he accused Mexico of sending people who brought drugs, crime, and rapists.
This was the beginning of numerous controversial remarks he would make throughout his campaign as he gained considerable coverage and was featured extensively on the news for his latest comment. However, the journalistic following he gained never took him seriously as a candidate in his early campaigning.
Instead he seemed like many celebrities on the news today featuring their latest scandal, which appealed to audiences. This status was reason enough for people to believe he would not gain the republican nomination or even still be around in November 2016.
Eventually, he attained the republican nomination in July 2016. These were early signs that he had been underestimated as a candidate and a foreshadowing of November.
Journalists continued coverage as the race was narrowed between Trump and Clinton. By this time, Trump had already gained significant media coverage.
Benjamin Fang, a reporter for the Queens Ledger who followed the election closely, explained that Trump’s status contributed to his attention.
“Trump was certainly the most interesting and entertaining candidate in the race, and it appears airing his speeches made for good television ratings. That often meant more money and clout for the cable news networks,” said Fang.
Ironically, the significant amount of coverage he gained actually ended up cementing his status among his voters.
“During the Republican primary, news organizations, specifically cable news like CNN and MSNBC, tended to show Trump’s speeches nearly in their entirety. That bias allowed voters to see Trump as not just a serious candidate, but for his message to get through without his campaign actually paying for airtime,” said Fang.
By February of 2016 he had earned approximately $2 billion in free media which was twice the amount spent on any entire presidential campaign, according to a New York Times article.
As Election Day approached, polling increased and became prevalent among viewers and readers who were informed Clinton was in the lead. Although coverage continued, the focus was more set on the outcome of the election. According to the Fang, this was an issue throughout the election race.
“The media often provided horserace coverage and political analysis. But what was severely lacking was a constant focus on the issues,” said Fang.
When the election results were announced, it was these factors on behalf of news media that played a role in the final outcome.
The earlier predictions issued by credible sources such as the New York Times were proven wrong and journalists were left to assess what had happened.
However, this wasn’t the only setback that night for journalism.
It is certain now that the American public’s trust of media will only decline further as a result of this election.
According to U.S. World and News Report, only 32 percent of Americans stated they had a fair amount of trust in the media in September.
Fang stated the outcome will have repercussions on that trust which has also been affected by the public turning towards news that fits their viewpoint.
“More and more people are turning away from trusted news sources like the New York Times or Washington Post in favor of their own partisan media. It’s a trend that has divided the country. Conservatives prefer not just Fox News, but also websites like The Blaze and Breitbart, which often provide shady and untruthful information. Liberals often rely on the same type of media, said Fang.
In addition to this dilemma, Trump has been vocal about his opposition to certain news outlets throughout his presidential campaign. In February, he stated he would “open up libel laws” to allow journalists to be sued when they write “purposely negative and horrible and false articles.” He also blacklisted organizations such as The Washington Post.
These actions would prove to be detrimental to journalist’s
“As journalists, we have to defend our right to report the news and tell the facts, even if we have to go to court,” said Fang. “It means not allowing Trump to bully the media, and even if we’re blacklisted, have the audacity to write about it. The media have to keep the powerful accountable.”
News organizations in the United States will face a long road ahead over the next four years. They must not only regain the public’s trust but also face a President who is openly opposed to them and threatens their duty to report.
During this time, news organizations must reevaluate their coverage, fact checking, and focus on issues not only for a Trump presidency but for future elections ahead.