The new battle cry: Why can’t the media ‘stop’ Trump?

The new battle cry: Why can’t the media ‘stop’ Trump? by Howard Kurtz. The establishment are apoplectic that Trump might be elected president — and are now declaring that it’s the media’s mission to halt him in his tracks.

What ever happened to the motion of the media as reporting the  news, instead of filtering it and telling us what to think? What is the “battle cry” of the headline? Who are the media battling? Voters who aren’t toeing the line, and opponents of the current political elite, obviously. Why can’t the media ‘stop’ Trump? Because, after years of political correctness, they  have little credibility and declining influence.

Kurtz doesn’t quite articulate that broader background, but makes he a few good points:

Nearly 7-1/2 years after Barack Obama’s election, we still hear a familiar refrain on the right: If only the media had properly vetted him, he would never have made it to the White House….

The current complaints center on the fantasy notion that news organizations have failed to aggressively report on Trump.

He lists the many aggressive media criticisms of Trump to show this is wrong, then:

I have read or seen a long line of commentators accusing Trump of being racist, sexist, misogynist, xenophobic, of being ignorant on policy, of encouraging violence.

And yet he keeps winning primaries. The negative media attention and fact-checking attempts bounce off him like rubber arrows. …

Commentators on the left and the right, united against Trump, have likened him to George Wallace and Adolf Hitler. That certainly constitutes sounding the alarm.

Disproportionate airtime?

But he also subjects himself to seemingly endless rounds of interviews … taking all manner of journalistic questions in a way that his opponents do not. Hillary Clinton, for instance, has gone about 100 days without holding a news conference.