Why Isn't The Media Reporting on This?
Because the powers that be are making sure nothing gets out.
I take it some of you have been following former president Donald Trump’s hush money trial - or you are hearing about it through a few social media posts or the grapevine. Or you know it is happening, but you don’t really care.
Either way, some of what has been revealed about the case, most especially Trump and his team paying porn star Stormy Daniels for her silence over her sexual relationship with Trump, says a lot about why some people never go to the press with their story or the news media does not report on certain stories.
Last we met, I talked about how some people may complain about some stories not being reported on when in truth, many news media outlets are covering them. Well now, let’s look at why some stories do not get reported at all and why that happens.
The U.S. Constitution says in the First Amendment the following: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
There’s been many interpretations of the First Amendment since the Constitution was first written. But as you can see, Congress cannot prohibit the press from doing its job, and that is to inform the public about what is going on in their neighborhoods, city, state/region, country, and the rest of the world. Knowing what is happening helps others make decisions, hopefully wise ones, such as voting, taking part in society. and taking care of themselves, a la the year 2020 during the COVID pandemic.
As Joseph Pulitzer put it, “A journalist is the lookout on the bridge of the ship of state.”
However, not everyone wants that lookout to exist or say anything. If everything that is being said during Trump’s hush money trial is true, this is a good example of those with enough money and power keeping from some stories getting out that would make them look bad and ruin their goals.
Apparently, during the last few weeks of his 2016 campaign, Trump was concerned that his fling with Stormy Daniels would be reported. His team had already made sure his affair with Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal wasn’t published, so they took action to make sure another affair story did not get out. This all came just after that Access Hollywood tape, where Trump was recorded talking about grabbing women by “the p***y” was released to the public in early October. If the public learned about Trump’s affair with Daniels, then what?
Hence the allegation of hush money to keep Daniels from talking publicly about her fling with Trump. Of course, the story got out anyway, but it just goes to show that sources or “those in the know” will be paid off from talking to the press, even if it matters a great deal. Intimidation and threats are also common.
For one thing, there is the meritless lawsuit known as SLAPP - “strategic lawsuit against public participation”. According to Governing, a publication that has been around since 1987 and is meant for those working in public agencies, SLAPP is “intended to intimidate and silence journalists, whistleblowers and everyday Americans.” It further explains that the plaintiff does not always win in court, but that’s not the point. The point is to cause stress and anxiety for the aforementioned with an expensive, time-consuming lawsuit. This would be enough to keep many people from ever talking to the press about any wrongdoings they know about.
The Society of Professional Journalists has been working on a project called “Gagged America” which has found many government employees are restricted from ever talking to the press. This does not necessarily mean federal government employees, but government workers on state and city levels. So far, the project has obtained information from 25 agencies and those findings reveal the following: “contact between employees and journalists must be handled by minders, often with titles like “public information officer” or “public affairs,” while 10 include vague language that can create confusion and leave employees unsure.”
The problem with public affairs or even press secretaries, they don’t address anything negative, however slight. They also may downplay more serious allegations or even not reply at all, leaving both the journalist and the public hanging. As for any employees who do speak to the press, the retaliation can be harsh. Not only do employees face losing their jobs, but also being blacklisted or facing other restrictions. If they signed an NDA, and they probably did, those employees would be in a world of trouble. As a result, government agencies will keep information from getting out to the public, leaving the people in the dark about countless things, such as what their tax money is being used for.
As a journalist who often covers education, I have dealt with many in local school communities who have been too nervous to come forward about many things, even minor education issues. Teachers may be afraid of job loss and parents fear retaliation from the principal of their children’s school. Fear is common in school communities, which leads to silence, which leads to many people being in the dark.
At the same time, I have experienced sources not wanting to talk to me because they were not pleased with the angle of the article or who I also spoke to for the article. In those cases, a person or a group of people sought to control the narrative and when that didn’t happen, they retracted everything they said and demanded that the article not be published. It could not be because, with their retracted words, there wasn’t much to work with. Again, valid information is kept from the public.
So there you have it. Important stories are kept away from the news media, and therefore the public, because fear and money do the work. I hope there will soon be a way to further protect whistleblowers and tipsters. Because the fear is real and journalists have the right to protect our sources. After all, the public has the right to know, and the fear and the money not only damage the sources but a functioning democracy.