377
It appears Trump’s ban on The Associated Press just got worse - Poynter
(www.poynter.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
377 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25032 readers
2218 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Wasn't freedom of speech a huge deal with these guys?... Now its controlled speech?... How is this legal? How is this real?
Surprise, it was freeze peaches the whole time just like every leftist ever scrawled about it.
The right likes to appropriate populist ideas to push through unpopular ones...
Having a spot in the white house press pool is legally a privilege, not a right. The AP can still operate and write whatever they like, they're just not invited to exclusive press briefings.
This is a long-standing conflict of interest that incentivizes the press to field softball questions and avoid writing critical stories in hopes of getting priority treatment from the government, but typically it works in a more subtle way.
So this unshackles the AP from bias in their reporting?
I mean, I guess you could look at it that way, to an extent. But the larger effect is that it reinforces the threat against every other major news outlet, in a very blunt and overt way.
I don't expect the AP to suddenly radicalize over it or anything.
Nobody is stopping AP from reporting the news. What they did was completely legal. Not sure why WHCA thinks they have monopoly power. They don't.
What? I mean, how can a president choose what questions or choose only favorable news outlets? I understand that in America it's red against blue with the news, but this just doesn't make sense to me. Neither does the fact that he can choose like this. It's very strange to begin with.
Have you been looking at the press pool list? How can you argue those are all favorable news outlets?
No I haven't. I read the article. But it's possible I misunderstood it.
You didn't misunderstand anything. They’re just yankin your chain