In the process of researching this
assignment, I was actually surprised to see such a wide gap in the way the
media covered Trump. The goal of each publication is very apparent from the
start of each article. Either the news shows Trump in a favorable light, an
unfavorable light, or a neutral one. From my searches, and maybe this is just
Google trying to profile me, it appeared that there were far more negative
articles in the news tab than positive or neutral. While, this could just be
that my Internet history blinders are up, I still find it surprising that I had
to deliberately seek out Fox News to find something good said about the
President.
![]() |
| I can't stress enough how much he looks like my grandmother. |
My first example gasses Trump up more
than your mother’s facebook friends. All the story covers is an
interview with Donald Trump’s son DTJR, talking about the incredible things
his father has accomplished in the first two months, at one point even stating
he had “gotten more done for the country in two months
than Presidents Obama and Bush”. There’s not a single fact or analysis of this
statement, or anything that could lead the audience to believe that DTJR’s
statement is false. The only
This
example is humorous to me mainly due to the lengths it goes to make Trump
look bad in a story about the attendance of baseball players at a white house
visit. There appears to be bias here because the main focus is on the players
that didn’t go than the players that did. I found several articles on the topic
of the Patriot visit, but most of them focused on the visit itself, unlike this
one that emphasized the missing players already by the headline. This is
clearly an example of journalistic bias. The fact that some of the players on
the New England Patriots baseball team do not agree with Trump or could not
make it to the White House on that specific day isn’t really news. However,
this article seems to point out a disconnect between America and their
president, which is a pretty powerful take on something as insignificant as
baseball players visiting Donald Trump.
This final article is actually the
only one I came across in all my generic searches that only intends to
deliver nothing more than factual news. The article goes on to detail the plans
for Trump’s meeting with Pope Francis this May. There is no aim to make
commentary about whether this makes Trump a good President, or a bad President,
but rather covering the plans for a meeting between two important people. The
increasingly polarized nature of our media makes it difficult to find coverage
like this. The Wall Street Journal has a good reputation for talking about news
in a way that doesn’t conflict with party affiliation of any kind. This is the
kind of publication we should seek out more often to get a neutral and fair
take on current events in this nation.


