(02-26-2017, 01:14 PM)Alram Wrote: In short, President Trump is only one president in a long history of an adversarial relationship with the press. Each president has had his own way of dealing with the issue, and Trump's tactics are by no means unique.
You raise a good point, and it deserves serious consideration. American history is long, and it's tempting-but-wrong to get so caught up in the moment (and in bias) that we forget the longer context.
By basic reply is that you are providing a Rogues' Gallery. These are not shining precedents of good presidents doing good things. These are examples of the failures of American institutions, and of the critical importance of checks on presidential authority. Jefferson was a schemer and a hypocrite who piously decried the muckraking of the press while simultaneously using James Callender to sling mud at his own opponents - only to have Callender turn on him later in life when Jefferson found the relationship inconvenient. Kennedy was an arrogant hothead, and let his anger push him into abusing powers that were not constitutionally his to wield. Grant's administration was a corrupt mess, and while that has almost certainly been overstated by historians interested in tarnishing his reputation (and advancing the reputation of his opponents...), the press was in fact uncovering the corruption of a deeply contaminated administration.
Coolidge, I think I'd be kinder to - he was hostile to the press. but this seems to be a more general stance of being reserved (Silent Cal!), rather than a policy of only talking to the media that says nice things about you, and overtly denouncing anyone who criticises your administration.
And yes, at the beginning of the Obama administration, the president and his team went to "war" against Fox News, for their involvement in hostile commentary and "fake news" (James O'Keefe and his "expose" of ACORN, among other things.) Other media outlets reacted much the same as they have now - by protesting that to exclude one is to insult them all, and Fox must be kept in the loop. Fox was not actually excluded in the end, and the administration bowed to media pressure; we shall see what happens under Trump. The Obama administration was notably poor about media transparency, but there is clearly room at the bottom.
So, yes. Not without precedent, but the precedents are not good ones. We are beginning from the lowest points, and the administration is being clear that they fully intend to follow through on their war on the media that disagree with them. Where this goes from here could very quickly end up in uncharted territory. And as past precedents suggest, how the rest of the media, the congress, and the public react to the President's behaviour is a critical part of how this proceeds from here...
-Jester