Media Trust in America: How Trump’s Presidency Challenged Journalism

Two generations ago, Walter Cronkite was the most trusted man in America. Today, the media landscape has dramatically shifted, with millions of Americans questioning the validity of the news they consume following years of “enemy of the people” rhetoric from former President Donald Trump and right-wing media outlets.

The consequences of this erosion of trust are far-reaching, according to Khadijah Costley White, assistant professor of journalism and media studies at Rutgers University. White, author of “Raising the Volume: How the News Media Created the Tea Party,” points out that while right-wing complaints about media bias predate Trump, his presidency intensified the problem.

“At their best, journalists imagine themselves as the fourth estate, providing checks and balances for those in power,” White explains. “Trump’s encouragement of retributive violence towards perceived opponents has made it more difficult for reporters to do their jobs and show up at events out of fear for their safety.”

This hostility toward journalists didn’t emerge in a vacuum. The current media landscape was shaped by decades of regulatory changes that transformed news from a public service into a profit-driven enterprise.

In the early 20th century, journalism underwent professionalization through universities and the creation of ethical standards. The Federal Communications Commission, established in 1934, was tasked with guarding the national public interest, requiring broadcasters to serve the public or risk losing their license.

The shift began in the 1970s and ’80s when the FCC adopted a more neoliberal approach to policy. “The bulk of the fairness doctrine was effectively struck down and commitment to protecting public interest declined,” White notes. “When broadcasters started realizing they could make money off TV news, we saw a shift in programming.”

The Telecommunications Act of 1996, signed by President Bill Clinton, further transformed the landscape by allowing media monopolies and conglomerates to grow substantially. This consolidation reduced control of media to a few select entities, setting the stage for Fox News and similar outlets.

These regulatory changes created an environment where news producers became increasingly focused on serving wealthy audiences who could purchase advertised products. This shift, combined with billionaire ownership of media companies, led to a landscape where science was frequently challenged, media became more siloed, and conspiracy theories flourished.

Trump capitalized on these vulnerabilities, using social media to bypass traditional media and communicate directly with his base. This approach fundamentally altered the relationship between the White House and the press corps.

“Through social media, high-profile folks get to manage their brand without talking with journalists who will make them answer questions,” White explains. “The result is that the press feels like they have to fight for access and are more likely to frame their coverage in ways that give them access instead of ways that help the public.”

Unlike previous presidents who generally prioritized accuracy to maintain credibility, Trump employed a different strategy. “Trump’s support was cultivated around his brand – white supremacy, wealth and greed – so as long as he stayed loyal to his brand, his accuracy wasn’t so important to his supporters,” White observes. His technique of making contradictory statements allowed supporters to choose whichever message resonated with them.

To prevent similar manipulation in the future, White suggests media outlets establish clear norms about coverage. “No president should have been screaming at reporters not to wear masks at press conferences. That’s a direct endangerment of your own employees,” she states. “If you have someone who demonstrably lies to the press, then you don’t allow them unfiltered news coverage or soundbites.”

White also advocates for increased regulation and truly public journalism sources similar to the BBC in the United Kingdom. While the U.S. has PBS and NPR, they receive limited public funding and remain dependent on sponsors and their predominantly white, middle-class audience.

“I think the other solution is appointing an FCC that once again believes the public interest should be at the forefront of communication policy rather than commercial interests and profits,” she adds.

Despite the challenges, White sees potential for recovery. “Trump has been a test for American democracy. He’s done all he can to expose the weakness of our institutions that should govern media, politics and executive branch behavior,” she concludes. “If the Biden administration takes seriously the need to respond to these tests and bolster what’s weak, it could be valuable for the integrity of our democracy.”