Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Eric Boehlert: Maggie Haberman, and when Trump access no longer matters [View all]
https://pressrun.media/p/maggie-haberman-and-what-happensMaggie Haberman, and when Trump access no longer matters
No more scoops
Eric Boehlert
2 hr ago
snip//
I have no doubt Trump himself served as a source/leaker for Haberman during his four years in office. Yes, he often publicly railed against her and the "liberal" New York Times, but that was likely part of the kabuki dance that went on as Trump and the Times often used each other to their benefit. Trump certainly provided the paper with crucial access. He wouldnt talk to me as much as he does if I wasnt at the Times, Haberman once said on a podcast. Thats just the reality. He craves the papers approval." According to Haberman, as president he would at times call her and thank her for her coverage, at one point giving one of her Trump stories an "8."
In return, Haberman and Times often normalized him in ways large and small. The daily spent years painting a false portrait of adult decision making at the White House, suggesting Trump was surrounded by a beehive of aides who plotted policy, instead of a madman setting the agenda.
snip//
Normalizing seemed to be the goal. When Haberman sat down with Trump in early 2019 for an extended Q&A, he lied nonstop and came across as utterly incoherent, yet the Times politely typed it all up as a normal White House interview.
In 2019, Haberman famously reported that Trump's former communications director (and likely longtime Times source) Hope Hicks faced an "existential choice " about whether or not to cooperate with a congressional subpoena, as if that's somehow the norm. "When a respected paper such as @nytimes calls this an existential question, rather than a question about complying with the law, we have a very serious problem with our democracy," Princeton University historian, Julian Zelizer stressed at the time. "This is what it looks like to become dysfunctional."
One year ago, Haberman's byline appeared on a deeply misguided front-page Times piece as America suffered from the government's futile pandemic response: "Despite Pushback, Trump Suggests Testing Is No Longer an Issue." As if his blatant lies ever should have ever been taken at face value, let alone during a deadly public health crisis.
Nonetheless, Haberman won industry accolades for her Trump reporting. Now with him off the stage the future seems uncertain. Thats what happens with access journalism.
27 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Eric Boehlert: Maggie Haberman, and when Trump access no longer matters [View all]
babylonsister
Apr 2021
OP
We must never forget how Haberman the hack and NYT carried water for the Trump admin. Nt
Fiendish Thingy
Apr 2021
#6
Maggie HACKerman will not be remembered as a fine journalist but rather a willing participant in
NoMoreRepugs
Apr 2021
#12
NYT also pushed for Clinton impeachment, with day after day of front page Whitewater headlines.
Midnight Writer
Apr 2021
#13
The NYT practically manufactured her email 'scandal' and pushed it throughout the 2016 campaign
dalton99a
Apr 2021
#21