Myths are often surrounded by controversy between the truth, and what actually occurred. The bible has a lot of stories that could be considered myths, but the difference between the bible and a myth is that the bible teaches a lesson. Jesus might have had a few more loaves of bread to feed thousands, but that does not take away from the lesson learned in helping those in need. The media consists of networks, broadcasters, journalists, and who knows how many countless jobs in order to produce news for the people. Free speech is always under the attack from upper powers that abuse the system, so Journalists worldwide unite in order to protect each other. The problem though currently plaguing the American public is the war brewing between the media and Trump which has left the public questioning who to believe, and what is actually going on in the country which in turn lowers the credibility of both the President and the Media. Improper reporting, and advances in technology have opened up reporting to be done on a wide range scale which also has brought falsehoods to the media due to anyone being able to write on any subject, and then post to the web. The rebuttal that Trump throws at the media’s claims and accusations against him confuse the American public and world because the most powerful man in the world is constantly vilified by his own country. 

President Trump at the beginning of his run he was seen as a just a media grab to land some attention. The media is what put Trump in place to win the Presidency due to constantly putting him in the press. (Azari). Azari writes, “To think more systematically about the role of the media in presidential nominations, we need to think about coordination.” (Azari). The media originally thought the American public was laughing at their coverage of Trump throughout political journey, but at some point in the coverage Americans began to gravitate towards Trump. The media did this by constantly interviewing him, and talking about some of his over the top idea. Trump was also a clear winner in terms of media coverage because he amassed about $2 billion worth of media attention while Hilary Clinton came in second with $746 million. (Confessore). This shows how coordination in the media boosted Trump because the media was after the ratings that Trump drew. All this coverage though came with a cost because it created a divide between the media and Trump that has only worsened as his first months in office have gone on because now the media wanted to destroy what they created. Arielle Padres of vice news wrote a piece criticizing first lady Melania before she even took office. The major claim of this article is that first lady Melania Trump will have trouble being first lady. At first, this article seemed credible due to the author interviewing someone with expansive knowledge of the first lady, but it was just a bash on the Trump’s. The credibility is very low because both women do not know why Melania is waiting to move into the white house, but with one search one will find that she is waiting until their son, Baron, is finished with the school year to make the move to D.C. This article also troubles me so much because I think the writer just uses her as a way to bash the President by saying, “If it’s still strange to Imagine Donald Trump-tabloid-verified sex-haver, unverified billionaire, Black Mirror character come to life-as president of the United States, think about how Melania Trump feels.” (Padres). Even President Obama casted his support in accepting a new President and seeing how they fair before casting judgement, so by writing this article the author is simply just trying to sway public opinion and pick up some clicks by writing about Trump.

The media in other parts of the world rely heavily on Americans to help protect them from their own government who abuses their power in order to gain influence. Joel Simon explains the dire situation in Pakistan with reporters being killed by the government. The Pakistani military controls the media by setting standards for what is okay to report. Simon proves this when he says, “Pakistani journalists are routinely summoned to have “tea” with officials, who criticize their report while simultaneously warning them of threats.” (Simon, 6). This practice of intimidation and killing journalists picked up after the killing of Bin Laden because of how Bin Laden’s killing. In America though we luckily have the right to say whatever we want, but there is a code that the media owes the American public in reporting news that is fact based, and not full of assumptions that just clout our heads. 

The New York Time and Vice News are outlets that have a solid reputation, but the times is more professional and accurate due to how the reporters go off facts. On the morning of January 11, 2017 Buzzfeed released memos amassed from an ex British intelligence agent with Russian ties that detail heinous acts to under the table deals made with Russian officials. The New York Times reported on the dossier, but did not jump to conclusions because much of the information is questionable as said, “But much of what he was told, and passed on to Fusion GPS, was very difficult to check.” (Times). The Vice article by Harry Cheadle though make a point to not overlook the articles, and tries to make Trump seem connected to the Russians. He cites various memos, but there is no point because no information is true, and worst of all is that the main storyline of Michael Cohen, Trump’s right hand man, was said to be meeting in Prague with Russian officials, but really was in California watching his son play baseball that day. (Times). The overreaction to claims that have no truth show how the media is tries to bring President Trump’s credibility in the eyes of the public down. In other words the media thinks by putting Trump down it will delegitimize him as a President. Piers Morgan said in an interview, “Reporters are comparing Trump to Watergate when the facts are that Trump has no connection to Russia.” (Morgan). Morgan also claims that during the campaign he picked up a New York Times paper that contained eleven pieces written about Trump that were all negative which shows the amount of negative coverage the media wanted Trump to have. 

The current state of journalism has become blurred due to technology because now anyone can report on something happening live from their phone which has made mass information available online. WikiLeaks creator, Julian Assange, dropped bombs by releasing U.S. government files on his site which sent the media into chaos. His files failed to remove names of current informants, and in general hurt military operations to an extent. He currently has to live in the Embassy of Ecuador due to the U.S. wanting to capture him. Simon sums his actions saying, “those who define themselves as professional journalists need more than ever to maintain standards and report with seriousness and objectivity.” (Simon, 166). Improper reporting by journalists takes away free speech because governments, or people of power, can swoop in and make restrictions that contain what the media can release. (Simon). Simon also explains how activists are using journalism as a way to get their message across which is great, but the news will not be the most accurate. Simon writes, “Some are fairly journalistic in their approach, and other are essentially propagandists for rebel forces.” (Simon, 153). 

These alarmist articles that are written by the media are a result of a mess that media themselves created by putting Donald Trump all over the television and internet because it drew interest. Azari writes, “To think more systematically about the role of the media in presidential nominations, we need to think about coordination.” (Azari). This shows how coordination in the media boosted Trump because the media was after the ratings that Trump drew. No one thought people actually would vote for him, but the American public gravitated toward him because his words addressed raw emotions while also being a candidate that Americans had never seen because he was not directly part of politics in Washington. The media just thought of Trump as a way to get clicks, and have some fun thinking of him as President. This all changed once he became the Republican candidate, and drastically changed after winning the Presidency. John Dickerson, a broadcaster for CBS, and Hugh Hewitt recently discussed the current articles being written about Trump and Hewitt had this to say, “it most explicitly does not mean that the press just throw out the standards.” (Hewitt). Both of these men toy with an example regarding a local Californian meteorologist claiming California is going to be wiped out by the Ocean. Hewitt uses this to show how the local news was being an alarmist about the storm while Dickerson illustrates how the local weatherman will not pay much of a penalty for being wrong. Dickerson breaks this down by explaining how the mass alarmism the media has shown toward Trump has come unwarranted at times which in turn has complicated the image of the press. In short the press has hurt its own reputation with the alarmist articles and not Trump. 

Rebuttal between Trump, and the media has brought credibility down because people do not know who to believe. Trump rejecting claims, and everything the media says about him only adds to the fact that media and him are not in sync. In a study that consisted of 2,104 adults of both men and women found that the majority of both men and women believe what they hear. (Kohut). Typically the American public trusts the media about the President. An example being as Kohut writes, “Indeed, at the time only 12% of the population gave Reagan a “1” (Lowest score) for believability. Yet even during his most successful year in terms of public approval, Reagan’s believability mean was “only” 2.84, significantly lower than the mean score achieved for 31 news organizations and journalists.” (Kohut). So, the American public typically trust other citizens giving them news instead of the government. Usually when people lose faith in the President they gain trust with the media (Kohut). The Iran-Contra Affair though shed new light on public opinion because research shows that when Raegan and the media both dipped in believability when in factual disputes with each other. (Robinson). As Robinson says, “studies show rebuttal from credible sources, or from anonymous sources which reflect the original predispositions of the audience, can erase or diminish the effects of a personal appeal or an appeal made through mass media.” (Robinson 17). These studies show that while the President will always have low credibility the media loses their own credibility when disputing with the President. 

The war between President Trump and the media is a result of improper reporting that has gone out of control. The media put Trump in this position, and to write their wrong they have continued to put out non validated information to try to delegitimize him as a president. The study that shows how Raegan and the media both fell in believability really shows how the media and President need to be together in order to properly have factual information for the public. It is also interesting that respected people in the media like Dickerson, Hewitt, and Morgan all agree that many people in the media are overhyping or producing alarmist articles that directly are just for the purpose of delegitimizing Trump as a President. Hopefully the media gives him a fresh start, and let him see what he can do first without criticizing his every move. Until this happens though they will continue to argue and leave the American public wandering what is actually going on. 
