Staff Reports
In the latest spectacle of drama emanating from the left-leaning press, Donald Trump has once again found himself at the center of a manufactured outrage storm over press access in the White House. This time, the Associated Press has chosen to clutch its pearls after being effectively disinvited from Trump’s informal Oval Office gatherings. To hear the media describe it, one might think Trump had just ripped up the Constitution in front of a live audience, rather than simply asserting his authority over which press outlets get a seat at the table.
The root of this escalating hysterics can be traced back to Trump’s playful challenge to the nomenclature of “The Gulf of America.” The Associated Press, seemingly positioning itself as the ultimate gatekeeper of journalistic terminology, rejected the change outright. Their refusal, which appears more childlike than principled, led to the obvious consequence: a lack of access to Trump’s informal press briefings. The absurdity of the reaction is almost comical; the press responds like a child denied dessert, unleashing a torrent of complaints about censorship and First Amendment violations as if the mere absence from a room equates to silencing their voices.
The response from the media community, particularly from the Associated Press’s leadership, could serve as an instructional video for melodramatic performances. Amidst the invocations of freedom of the press and dire predictions about the state of democracy, the AP’s Executive Editor mysteriously retreated from social media, abandoning any semblance of open dialogue. This irony was not lost on observers who noted that while lamenting their own oppression, they were simultaneously denying others the opportunity to engage with their narrative.
Even groups like The FIRE Organization, known for championing free speech, chimed in with a sense of looming doom, declaring Trump’s actions as “viewpoint discrimination” and an “attack” on fundamental freedoms. Yet, in a twist of bitter irony, one could not help but wonder why such indignation was absent when the Biden administration implemented similar policies. The selective outrage displayed by these organizations highlights a glaring double standard in how freedom of the press is defended based on party lines.
https://t.co/30BiOPyKGK
Donald Trump's recent decision to limit press access for Associated Press reporters due to their refusal to adopt the term "Gulf of America" has sparked significant outrage in the media. Critics argue this action infringes on First Amendment rights, with…— The America One News (@am1_news) February 12, 2025
In the midst of all this commotion, it’s worth browsing the AP’s own selective application of language and terminology. The outlet has a storied history of playing semantic games, such as its insistence on capitalizing “Black” while relegating “white” to a lowercase designation. Furthermore, their sensitivity in describing unlawful conduct has been astonishing; the term “illegal immigrants” is deemed unacceptable even when the act itself is indisputably against the law. Meanwhile, during recent national unrest, the AP deftly avoided labeling riots instigated by leftist groups while swiftly pivoting to apply a stricter label of “insurrection” for the January 6 Capitol incident.
The current episode merely underscores the ongoing insistence by left-oriented news outlets on maintaining contradictory standards while crying foul when excluded from a press gathering they believe they inherently deserve to attend. This hypocrisy is emblematic of the broader issue of media accountability. Rather than being genuinely silenced, the AP continues to produce content and share its interpretations of events, reinforcing the notion that this outrage is less about the press’s freedom and more about its perceived entitlement to access. The reality is, the Associated Press’s “crisis” is nothing more than the latest in a series of exaggerated responses that seek to elevate grievances over substance, all while the press domain remains very much alive and kicking.
