In November 2018, President Donald Trump and the White House revoked CNN reporter Jim Acosta’s hard pass. He was no longer allowed to enter the white house and attend press conferences. This suspiciously occurred right after the president and Acosta had a tense press conference earlier. Trump has been known to criticize reporters and their networks. During this press conference, he had continually been shutting down Acosta from asking questions. The president began insulting him calling him “a rude, terrible person” (Stelter, B.) He was also insulting CNN and NBC claiming it is “fake news” (Castellano, A.). The majority of the press conference was Trump insulting reporters, especially Acosta, to avoid answering the hard questions they were asking. The next time Acosta attempted to enter the White House, he was denied by a security guard with no previous warning. This then led to CNN taking this issue to the federal court in attempts to get Jim Acosta’s hard pass returned. Jim Acosta’s hard pass was eventually returned, but there were new rules put in place by the White House to follow.
The first legal issue you think of in this case is the First Amendment. CNN argued that the White House had violated the First and Fifth amendment. The White House’s defense was that they did not break the First Amendment. They stated it is not a part of the First amendment to be at the press conferences (Farhi, P.). Press conferences are really not required at all. Although he has no right to be allowed in the press conference, Acosta does have the right to report without fear of being punished (Levinton, J.). However, there was a fair argument concerning the fifth amendment. The Fifth Amendment ensures that government actions are guided by clear procedure, not arbitrary action (Farhi, P.). CNN argues that Acosta had no warning that his pass was going to be revoked. It was a very abrupt decision that had no due process. He was never given a reason to why his pass was taken away. The judge ruled that Acosta be returned his hard pass. However, when the White House gave Acosta his hard pass, they announced that they had some new rules for press conferences. These rules included one question per reporter, follow up questions were to be granted by the president, and physically surrendering the microphone. Failure to follow these rules would result in the revoking of the journalist’s hard pass (Haslett, C.).
This situation was very significant: a hard pass had never been taken from a reporter before this incident. Reflecting on everything that happened makes me worrisome. Having a president that acts so child-like and spontaneously is hard to fathom. He has people to back him up when he wants to act in retaliation towards a person he had a previous confrontation with. Although there was not a terrible amount of damage done, I believe the thought of what the president or the White House expects our press to be like is scary. President Trump makes it clear that he would rather not have an open press. Knowing that he thinks it is acceptable to eliminate one reporter from a press conference is unsettling. He already dances around questions with insults. I believe it absolutely necessary to have a free press. I thought it was odd when the White House released the new rules for press conferences. It shows that the president and White House is afraid of hard questions and would like to hold more power in these situations. The First Amendment is not to be taken for granted. As the public, we rely on the reporters and news outlets to give us the information we need to make informed decisions. I think one thing Trump and the White House needs to remember is that the reporters and journalists are asking hard questions to represent us, the people.
Works Cited
Stelter, B. (2018, November 08). White House pulls CNN reporter Jim Acosta's pass after
contentious news conference. Retrieved February 03, 2019, from https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/media/trump-cnn-press-conference/index.html
Castellano, A. (2012, September 11). Joe Francis Hit With $20M in Punitive Damages in Steve Wynn Slander Case. Retrieved February 03, 2019, from https://abcnews.go.com/US/steve-wynn-awarded-20-million-slander-suit-joe/story?id=17206604
Farhi, P. (2018, November 14). Trump lawyers, CNN square off in federal court in Jim Acosta case. Retrieved February 04, 2019, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/trump-lawyers-cnn-square-off-in-federal-court-in-jim-acosta-case/2018/11/14/16988874-e863-11e8-a939-9469f1166f9d_story.html?utm_term=.8f0dd6c54364
Levinton, J. (n.d.). Opinion | Here's the most troubling part of Trump and Acosta's bitter legal battle. Retrieved February 04, 2019, from https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/jim-acosta-cnn-s-legal-battle-trump-far-over-here-ncna937991
Haslett, C. (2018, November 19). White House drops effort to suspend press pass for CNN's Jim Acosta; outlines rules to reporters. Retrieved February 04, 2019, from https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-jim-acostas-press-pass-cnn-seeks/story?id=59291734
Good work, but you need about 150 more words to meet the requirement.
ReplyDeleteThere were some small issues, but nothing major. You used a lot of passive voice, which fine. It just weakens the points or stances you have. Passive voice talks about an action, active voice completes that action. An example from your work is 'He was no longer allowed to enter the white house and attend press conferences.' That isn't saying that the White House banned Jim Acosta, it's saying that a ban happened to this person. A way to make that active could be 'The White House banned Jim Acosta (it's best to use names early in articles) from press conferences and the White House grounds.' That's just one way to make that active voice.
Overall, this was another good article. It just suffered from being too short and some passive voice. Keep up the good work.