WAS: What Adults are Saying about Asking Relevant Questions
As 47 carries on with nonsense who is calculating the batting average?
A sure sign that a democracy has (hopefully, only temporarily) lost its news media to fulfill its vital social role is when journalists keep showing up to cover a “newsmaker” who with clockwork regularity does the same thing all day, every day just as the day before. Heralding those actions as newsworthy not only perverts the information concept of “news” but it wastes, expensive, critical resources at a time when America badly needs some context and perspective about 47’s administration and his band of bootlicking thieves.
While America’s President is not necessarily consistent in what nonsense he spews, he is remarkably predictable about how he spews it and that in the end none of it is substantial news in the sense of disclosing new facts, figures or decisions. Of course facts, figures and decisions—hallmarks of the adult world—are something 47 has never admired. That’s because he’s not an adult—playing his endless “I know you are but what am I…?” schoolyard game when speaking as America’s leader and/or most recognizable felon. He is also this way because—as was learned during 47’s first tour in Washington—”alternative facts” fit so much easier for all the partisan political hacking that needs to occur.
To wit, since his inauguration 47’s public engagement follows this rote pattern:
He says something outrageous—relevant or not—to the matters of government and state he faces.
On cue from this his minions—elected or not—twist norms, the law, decency and most other elements of human civilization into grotesque forms that are endlessly nonsensical.
This often follows with announced “tough” action. It might be the unilateral slashing of staff at government agencies. It might be threatening severe trade tariffs. It might be as was recently detailed here, committing treason. It might be any number of mind-bending things that is the base of nonsense defining the politics of 47 and his followers.
Shortly after the “tough” talk 47 then gets repeatedly neutered by either another nation responding with its own threats, courts serving injunction on the legality of his actions, or other things that underscore the man has never understood the difference between politics and governing. Correct that, other than grifting—the man has never understood much of anything.
So with such patterned consistency deeply ingrained into 47’s spew one asks why aren’t media frequently asking questions and reporting on topics germane about this behavior? Simply reporting the latest nonsense offered is not news at all—it is being a stenographer. That’s because the constancy of 47’s behavior. Similar to being a weather forecaster in San Diego, the range of possible outcomes when he speaks is very narrow. So when does the consequential substance of his bombast get media focus as opposed to his outrageous technique or scandalizing claims?
We can’t know who in the working media today is neutered by yellow-spined bosses and owners. We can’t know those who are simply desperate to hang onto their paychecks for whatever reasons. We can’t even know how quietly some may have fallen victim to Stockholm Syndrome. Being on the contemporary Washington beat is not for the faint hearted and its hard to imagine most journalists could ever foresee relations like this with any White House. But that’s precisely the last reason why to trudge through the day waving a white flag while invoking putrid, sane-washed coverage of 47 and his circus.
It’s time to shift efforts with a new impetus on query’s that carry some heft. These are becoming increasingly needed. Media might consider stuff like:
“…through DOGE and your administration you have announced _____ cuts to government agencies that have resulted in firings only to find many of those stopped or reversed in a matter of days by Federal Courts. Why is this?”
Or perhaps:
“…are you concerned the unpopularity of your administration’s actions will undercut your ability to govern with authority and claim the voter-mandate you have for this term?”
Or even the nuclear:
“..You and your team have asked for the resignation of Ukraine President Zelensky as means to achieve peace with Russia. Have you considered asking the same from President Putin to achieve peace?”
Far beyond being “hard” or even “snarky” these questions are above all else pointed and signal the end of media and its compliant winking. One of the honors of any President holding the bully pulpit is that he gets to determine the “agenda” about which he speaks. In cases of an open press conference this dynamic shifts some but to date, 47 has largely avoided this type of media interaction. Querying reporters currently just respond, and as a collective, have been massively underwhelming in drilling down into the merits of daily, wacky claims. To many their work has shifted simply to “report what is said” without any corresponding consideration to “report the truth” or God forbid the aspirational, “report the truth with context.”
Beyond the unique barriers noted above, 47 always looms as an instant reviewer of questioner quality—which is to say is it sufficiently harmless that he’s not put on the spot.? Yet if toadying as an approach seldom puts the President “on the spot”, then when and with whom, do media exercise their adversarial role as the fourth estate? Sure, any of these suggested questions could easily be met with:
“…that’s a very dumb question which I’m surprised about in coming from someone like you. Very dumb.”
That oft-repeated nonsense deters reasonable querying? In this context one might think true journalists would find this putdown a badge of honor! That’s why those receiving it should more broadly grasp it’s simply more preamble to falsity or the next law 47 wishes to break. So when this occurs a common story lead emerges suitable for omnimedia that might look like this:
“While again insulting reporters covering his message, President 47 continues to ignore questions about (topic). This continues as Federal courts have slowed, altered or stopped (number) of his recent Executive Orders.”
Easy-peasy.
As this pattern continues it might also invite new metrics driving descriptive summaries of the following about 47’s propaganda:
The percentage of “executive orders” that have been either curtailed or stopped within 7 days of issuance? Within 30 days?
The percentage of claims or such orders that have been “talked-back” by 47 and his administration shortly after their uttering or issuance? What is the average length of time between when 47 first says something to the point when contradiction begins? Hours? Days? Weeks?
The incremental cost of complying with Judicial orders that undercut original executive orders. Isn’t this the very thing 47 and bromance pal Musk are after? Cutting government cost?
To what degree are executive orders, with a low chance of staying, interfering with the GOP’s legislative efforts?
To what degree are executive orders, with a low chance of staying, interfering with financial markets?
To what degree does a focus on so many, isolated, specific, challenged executive orders interfere with 47’s ability to tend to other areas of his vast duties?
Get it? These questions aren’t exactly envelope pushing nor are they “second generation derived.” They are just common sense in an instance where a President traffics solely in the opposite. Where his team enlists the best script writers from the WWE to treat the Presidency like just another professional wrestling skit. Where those offering bribes (assuming the price is right) are promptly served. Where the crypto world is giddy with hope 47 will normalize the money-laundering, tax evading ambition that is “non-fungible tokens.” For whoever is left on the White House beat with half a pulse, your life as a journalist is as bad as it it ever can get. Your profession is plummeting into irrelevancy while too many colleagues still ask the President questions suggesting they are in high school. What do you have to lose by occasionally bowing your back and asking the head of government some decent questions on behalf of those governed?