This past weekend I listened to a bracingly entertaining conversation that the public radio program “On the Media” conducted with tech journalist Ed Zitron. Co-host Brooke Gladstone had billed it as a chance for Zitron to make sense out of DeepSeek, the new Chinese artificial-intelligence software that purports to do what ChatGPT and its ilk can do for a fraction of the cost — and, presumably, while using a fraction of the electric power burned by American AI companies.
But it was so much more than that. Maybe you’re familiar with Zitron. I wasn’t. As I learned, he is a caustic skeptic of American AI in general. In fact, he doesn’t even regard the large language models (LLMs) that we’ve come to think of as AI as the real thing, saying they are nothing but an error-prone scam that is attracting fast sums of venture capital but will never make any money. Here’s a taste:
The real damage that DeepSeek’s done is they’ve proven that America doesn’t really want to innovate. America doesn’t compete. There is no AI arms race. There is no real killer app to any of this. ChatGPT has 200 million weekly users. People say that’s a sign of something. Yes, that’s what happens when literally every news outlet, all the time, for two years, has been saying that ChatGPT is the biggest thing without sitting down and saying, “What does this bloody thing do and why does it matter?” “Oh, great. It helps me cheat at my college papers.”
And this:
When you actually look at the products, like OpenAI’s operator, they suck. They’re crap. They don’t work. Even now the media is still like, “Well, theoretically this could work.” They can’t. Large language models are not built for distinct tasks. They don’t do things. They are language models. If you are going to make an agent work, you have to find rules for effectively the real world, which AI has proven itself. I mean real AI, not generative AI that isn’t even autonomous is quite difficult.
As you can tell, Zitron has a Brit’s gift for vitriol, which made the program all the more compelling. Now, I am absolutely no expert in AI, but I was intrigued by Zitron’s assertion that LLMs are not AI, and that real AI is already working well in things like autonomous cars. (Really?)But given that we just can’t keep AI — excuse me, LLMs — from infesting journalism, I regarded Gladstone’s interview with Zitron as a reason to be hopeful. Maybe the robots aren’t going to take over after all.
On the latest “What Works” podcast, Ellen Clegg and I talk with Matt DeRienzo, the new director of SciLine. The project was founded seven years ago to make it easier for reporters to get in touch with scientists on deadline and to dig into research. And facts. The program is part of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a 150-year-old organization that publishes the widely respected journal Science.
Most recently, Matt has been serving as temporary executive editor of Lookout Santa Cruz, the digital daily that won a Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News in 2024. He has a long track record in investigative and local news, serving as an innovative daily newspaper editor and publisher in Connecticut about 15 years ago. I interviewed Matt in 2011 for my book “The Wired City” when Matt was editor of the New Haven Register and the slogan “Digital First” meant something more than a warning that Alden Global Capital was coming to town.
Matt joins SciLine at an important time. The Trump administration has suspended communications by government agencies that oversee science. Yet many newsrooms aren’t equipped to cover this because they have cut back on science coverage, if they do any at all. SciLine helps reporters find expert sources and gives them the tools to interpret cutting-edge research. Matt has a staff of 14 and the organization seems poised for growth.
I’ve got a Quick Take that hits close to my home in Medford, Massachusetts. A brand-new digital-only for-profit news outlet called Gotta Know Medford is on the verge of going live. It’s the first time the city of nearly 60,000 has had a dedicated local news outlet in three years, after it was abandoned by Gannett.
Ellen’s Quick Take involves big changes in Maine. In Bangor, the Bangor Daily News, a family-owned paper, is cutting back on staff-written editorials and opening the pages up to new voices. Separately, at the National Trust for Local News, which acquired the Portland Press Herald and a number of other Maine papers in 2023, the co-founder and CEO, Elizabeth Hansen Shapiro, is stepping down. We interviewed Dr. Hansen Shapiro for our book, “What Works in Community News,” and for an earlier episode of this podcast.
Some very good news for freedom of the press in Massachusetts: Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone has ruled that Boston magazine reporter Gretchen Voss will not be compelled to produce notes she took from an off-the-record interview with murder suspect Karen Read (earlier coverage).
The ruling was first reported by Lance Reynolds of the Boston Herald.
Cannone’s decision reverses an order she had issued in December that would have required Voss to turn over her notes. In so doing, the judge found that those notes “are of a different character than the unredacted recordings of the ‘on the record’ interviews produced pursuant to the Court’s previous order.” Cannone continues:
Voss has articulated a compelling argument that requiring disclosure of the notes poses a greater risk to the free flow of information than the other materials produced. Conversely, the Commonwealth [that is, the prosecution] has not demonstrated to the Court that its need for the handwritten notes, separate from the audio recordings, outweighs the danger posed to the public interest in the free flow of information.
What Cannone is referring to is her earlier decision to allow the prosecution access to recordings Voss had made in the course of interviewing Read. The judge’s new decision, handed down on Friday, pertains to handwritten notes that Voss had taken while conducting an off-the-record interview with Read in June 2023. In an affidavit, Voss said:
The entire meeting was off the record; I agreed in advance with Ms. Read and her lawyers that if there were any quotes I wanted to attribute to her during this meeting, I would need her and their express permission. As I did not actually use any of Ms. Read’s statements from that meeting in the article, such permission did not end up being necessary.
Moreover, Voss said, being forced to turn over her notes would open herself up to a campaign of villification that began after her article about the case was published in September 2023 and had only recently begun to abate:
[T]he notes, standing alone, will likely require further explanation on my part to make sense of them. I have already suffered an enormous emotional toll from publishing this story: I have been routinely harassed, both online and in person; have received text messages from strangers to my private cell phone containing photographs of my children and indirect threats against them; have had my photograph posted without my consent on Facebook, with hordes of strangers accusing me of unethical behavior and other defamatory accusations; have been approached, verbally assaulted and photographed without my consent in public, including in the courthouse, among many, many other acts and incidents against my person, my family, my character and my career. While the level of harassment has subsided somewhat over time, I have no doubt it will pick up again if my interview with Ms. Read becomes an issue for debate at trial.
A separate affidavit was submitted by BoMag editor Chris Vogel, who said that allowing Cannone’s earlier order to stand would impede investigative reporting because it would increase the costs and resources necessary to produce such work. “Magazines like ours will not be able to risk becoming enmeshed in situations such as this one, with the result that the flow of vigorous reporting will suffer,” Vogel said. “We will feel we have no choice but to select tamer, less controversial topics for our coverage.” Continue reading “Boston magazine ruling advances press freedom; plus, a tale of two obits, and the late Ted Rowse”
A U.S. Army Blackhawk helicopter was involved in a deadly collision with a civilian jet on Wednesday evening, claiming the lives of 67 people. Photo (cc) 2016 by the National Guard.
Donald Trump’s reprehensible comments about diversity, equity and inclusion being somehow responsible for Wednesday’s deadly crash between a jet and an Army helicopter included a swipe at people with disabilities; dwarfism was among the conditions he mentioned. Here’s part of his rant (gift link):
[T]he FAA is actively recruiting workers who suffer severe intellectual disabilities, psychiatric problems, and other mental and physical conditions under a diversity and inclusion hiring initiative spelled out on the agency’s website….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of airplanes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot, a little dot on the map, little runway.
As many of you know, we’re part of the dwarfism community. Our adult daughter, Becky, has achondroplasia, which is the most common form of dwarfism. With the proper training, she could, if she wanted, become an air-traffic controller — only maybe not now, I guess. Anyone who isn’t a six-foot-tall straight white man need not apply.
Little People of America, a national organization for people with dwarfism and their families, issued a strong statement about Trump’s evil remarks on Thursday. It’s not likely to get the pickup that it should, so I’m reproducing it here in full.
Little People of America, along with other disability advocacy organizations, are concerned and disgusted by the recent remarks that President Trump and Pete Hegseth made after a deadly mid-air collision yesterday evening — blaming DEI as the reason.
Trump’s statement that those with disabilities — singling out dwarfism amongst the list — are not qualified to perform jobs at the FAA is harmful and demonstrably false. Discriminatory statements like these continue to dismantle the already difficult task of educating the public about disability equity.
Insinuating that individuals with disabilities are less capable and not “the best and brightest” flies in the face of ADA and the protections afforded applicants for jobs they are qualified for.
Merit based employment is not contradictory to DEI opportunities for applicants. A diverse workforce brings a wide range of perspectives that ultimately strengthen institutions and contributes to the mission of public safety. The work of people with disabilities at agencies like the FAA is vital. The suggestion that their inclusion somehow undermines the FAA’s effectiveness is not only inaccurate but dismissive of their value as employees and applicants.
LPA remains, as always, committed to fostering an environment and a community of equality and opportunity for those in the disability community and wholly supports DEI initiatives. As an advocacy organization committed to promoting equality and opportunity for people with disabilities, we call on all public figures to engage in thoughtful, respectful discussions that uplift all individuals, rather than perpetuate division or discrimination. People with disabilities deserve respect, dignity, and equal opportunities.
We encourage our community and the public to continue advocating for the inclusion and recognition of all individuals, particularly those who are often marginalized, and to reject rhetoric that diminishes their worth.
And while we’re at it, we should never forget that Trump mocked a reporter with a disability at one of his 2015 rallies — a shockingly offensive action that should have ended his involvement in national politics. But here we are.
I’m posting this because tomorrow is the last day of January and I still have a bunch of gift links to The New York Times that I haven’t used. The clock resets at midnight on Friday. (Let me know if there are more that you’d like.) Both links below should work even if you’re not a Times subscriber.
David Streitfeld as an interesting interview with Bill Gates, the one-time bad boy of tech who now looks pretty good compared to Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg et al. Gates has just published a memoir, “Source Code,” which is the subject of this Times review by Jennifer Szalai.
Unlike his tech brethren, Gates, who co-founded Microsoft, has remained left-of-center and devoted to his philanthropic endeavors. He is far from perfect, of course, and Streitfeld observes that his reputation took a hit when he divorced his much-admired then-wife, Melinda French Gates, and when it was revealed that he’d spent time with the pedophile Jeffrey Epstein (Gates has never been tied to Epstein’s monstrous sex crimes).
But Gates seems to have a mature, bemused attitude about what other people think of him. He also doesn’t shy away from admitting when he’s been wrong. He says he’s paid $14 billion in taxes over the years and adds that it should have been $40 billion if we had a fairer system. We also learn that donated $50 million to a group supporting Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign.
When I listened to Walter Isaacson’s biography of the late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs some years ago, I was struck by Gates thoughtful take. He was by far the most insightful of the many people whom Isaacson interviewed. Jobs is someone I admire, but I wonder if he would have found himself up on the platform with Donald Trump last week. Gates, to his credit, was not.
Elizabeth Hansen Shapiro, who co-founded the National Trust for Local News four years ago, is stepping down as the organization’s CEO. Dr. Hansen Shapiro’s announcement arrived in my inbox just a short time ago, and I have not had an opportunity to digest it. I may have more to say in the days and weeks ahead.
Eric Russell covers the story for the Portland Press Herald, which is one of the papers owned by the Trust.
I interviewed Hansen Shapiro for the book that Ellen Clegg and I wrote, “What Works in Community News,” to discuss the National Trust’s role in acquiring a group of weekly and monthly newspapers in the suburbs of Denver, Colorado, back in 2021. Ellen and I also interviewed her for our podcast, “What Works: The Future of Local News,” in 2022, and an excerpt is featured in our book.
I can also credit Hansen Shapiro with suggesting that we take a look at NJ Spotlight News, which represents the merger of a website that covers politics and public policy in New Jersey with NJ PBS, the state’s public television outlet. It turned out to be a terrific recommendation, and NJ Spotlight News anchors one of the chapters in our book.
More synchronicity: In 2023, the National Trust purchased the Portland Press Herald and a group of affiliated daily and weekly papers in Maine. Last fall, Ellen and I were the guests of the Maine Trust for a talk about our book that also served as a fundraiser for the Maine papers. In December, though, Lisa DeSisto — a professional friend of Ellen’s and mine — suddenly left as CEO and publisher of the Maine Trust. I suspect there may be more news to come on what’s going on in Maine.
Hansen Shapiro’s original idea for the National Trust was to acquire family-owned newspapers that were in danger of falling into the hands of a corporate chain or hedge fund. And she has succeeded, presiding over the purchase of papers in Colorado, Maine and Georgia. I wish her good luck as she ponders what’s next. Her full announcement follows:
A Founder’s Reflection: On Building and Becoming
When I stepped out of academia four years ago to co-found the National Trust for Local News, I was answering a call that felt bigger than myself. I believed then, as I believe now, in the profound importance of preserving and reimagining our nation’s local storytelling institutions. Like the Nature Conservancy’s work to protect our natural heritage, we set out to conserve and transform the vital institutions that help communities understand themselves and each other.
In these four years, we’ve built something extraordinary together. We’ve demonstrated that a new model of stewardship is possible — one that honors both preservation and innovation, tradition and transformation. We’ve shown that what unites us truly is stronger than what divides us, and that local journalism can be a powerful force for reweaving our civic fabric. The challenges ahead are real, but so too is the strength of what we’ve built together.
As I reflect on this journey, I recognize that the very principles that guided our work — trust in community wisdom, belief in the power of transformation, and faith in our shared stories — now guide me to make a transition. I have decided to step down as CEO and am working closely with the board to transition to new leadership.
This moment arrives not as an ending, but as evolution: the vision that called me to build now calls me to step back, trusting in the foundation we’ve laid and the wisdom of those who will carry it forward. What began as a mission to build has become a lesson in letting go, in trusting that what we’ve created together has its own wisdom and momentum.
I look to the horizon of local news and see the seeds we’ve planted taking root in ways we may not yet imagine. I envision our work flowering into a thousand expressions of community storytelling, each uniquely adapted to its place and people. I see newsrooms becoming not just repositories of information, but sacred spaces where community wisdom is gathered, preserved, and shared across generations. I believe the National Trust will continue to be a crucible where tradition and innovation meet, where storytelling finds new forms, and where the threads of community are constantly rewoven into ever-stronger fabric.
To our generous supporters who believed in this vision from its earliest days: Your faith in what was possible, your willingness to invest in new models, and your commitment to community storytelling have made everything possible. You understood that preserving local journalism requires both innovation and deep respect for tradition. May your courage in supporting new paths forward inspire others to join in this vital work.
To those who will carry this work forward: May you find joy in being stewards of these community treasures. May you have the courage to preserve what is precious and the wisdom to welcome necessary change. May you feel the support of all who have contributed to this mission, and may you trust in the profound importance of your work.
I step back with profound gratitude for how this journey has transformed me even as we’ve worked to transform the landscape of local news. The story of the National Trust continues, evolving as all good stories do. I look forward to watching and supporting its next chapter, knowing that the work of preserving and reimagining local journalism is more vital than ever.
I want to express a contrarian view regarding Jim Acosta’s departure from CNN. As you may know, Costa announced this morning that he’s leaving after CEO Mark Thompson told him he was being moved off his 10 a.m. program, which draws good ratings. Costa decided to leave after rejecting Thompson’s offer to be moved from midnight to 2 a.m.
This is widely being portrayed as another example of a media outlet doing Donald Trump’s bidding. Costa is not one of Trump’s favorites, to put it mildly; his White House press credentials were briefly revoked following a confrontation between him and Trump in 2018, and he has used his morning show to speak truth to power. That’s something we need more of.
Acosta’s admirers have been erupting in outrage on social media. Political commentator Chris Cillizza did not offer a benign interpretation, writing, “Acosta’s removal … is rightly understood as a piece of a broader movement of the legacy media to accommodate Trump — or at least take a far-less adversarial tack in covering his second term.”
Media writer Oliver Darcy, who first broke the news that Acosta might be leaving, wrote that the “move … conspicuously coincided with Donald Trump’s return to power.”
“Just Jack,” who has nearly 435,000 followers on Bluesky, added, “Jim Acosta is leaving CNN. He will not capitulate to his oligarch bosses. He will not kiss the Trump ring.”
Now, I don’t have any insight into what went on behind the scenes at CNN, but I don’t think this is as bad as it sounds. As Darcy observes, Acosta’s midnight special would have run in prime time, from 9 to 11 p.m., on the West Coast, which is traditionally underserved by network television.
About 50 million Americans live in that time zone, which includes major cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Portland and Seattle. Moreover, CNN was reportedly willing to pay for Acosta to move to Los Angeles.
I can also understand why Thompson might want to move away from an opinionated show in the morning and replace it with straight news. The 10 a.m.-to-noon slot will now be anchored by Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown.
Could this be an example of CNN caving in to Trump? Yes, it could. As I said, I have no insight into what’s going on behind the scenes. But more news and less opinion in the morning coupled with a capable host like Acosta anchoring during prime time on the West Coast does not strike me as unreasonable. In fact, it seems like it could have been a pretty smart move.
But Acosta said no, leave us to wonder what’s next. In his sign-off, he said he’ll be announcing something soon. MSNBC is a possibility, although its lineup seems to be getting pretty crowded. Maybe he’ll do something completely unexpected.
The Massachusetts Statehouse. Photo (cc) 2024 by Dan Kennedy.
One of the first media pieces I wrote for The Boston Phoenix was about the declining number of reporters who were covering state government in Massachusetts. I spent some time in the press gallery at the Statehouse interviewing members of the shrinking press corps, including Carolyn Ryan, then with The Patriot Ledger of Quincy, now managing editor of The New York Times.
Although I can’t find the story online, I know this was in 1995 or thereabouts. The situation has not improved over the past 30 years.
Last week Gintautas Dumcius of CommonWealth Beacon, who definitely knows his way around the Statehouse, reported that The Associated Press’ Steve LeBlanc is leaving Beacon Hill after taking a buyout and is unlikely to be replaced. Although an AP spokesman said the wire service will continue to cover the Legislature, Glen Johnson, who’s a former AP Statehouse bureau chief, told Dumcius that it won’t be the same without someone in the building:
There’s no substitute for being physically present where news happens and in a statehouse, there’s few things more powerful than being able to confront a newsmaker in person and at times other than official events. That only comes from proximity to power….
Some of the biggest stories I got as a statehouse reporter came because I bumped into somebody unexpectedly or saw something that I otherwise wouldn’t have seen.
As Dumcius points out, the move comes at a time when two newspaper chains owned by hedge funds, Gannett and McClatchy, have dropped the AP as a cost-cutting move. It’s a vicious circle. An AP subscription is expensive. News organizations walk away. The AP is left with fewer clients and thus has to increase its prices even more or cut back on coverage. Or both.
Jerry Berger, a former Statehouse bureau chief for United Press International who’s now a journalism professor at Boston University, recalls a time when the AP and UPI competed fiercely for news about state government. In his newsletter, “In Other Words…,” Berger says:
The Massachusetts Statehouse Press Gallery used to be a rowdy and raucous place, where reporters for two wire services and outlets from around the state worked side-by-side, in fierce competition, to document the daily workings of Massachusetts government.
Today, you can hear a pin drop — and the echoes just got a bit louder with word the Associated Press no longer has someone stationed in Room 456.
While I continue on my trip down memory lane, I’ll observe here that The Daily Times Chronicle of Woburn, where I worked in the 1980s, got its Statehouse news from UPI. I used to do a bit of stringing for the agency, and I think I’m the only freelancer who ever wrote for UPI and got all the money that was due him. Today, as Berger notes, UPI is owned by a company affiliated with the Unification Church, once headed by the late Rev. Sun Myung Moon.
Fortunately, there are still multiple news outlets covering state government in Massachusetts, including The Boston Globe, State House News Service, CommonWealth Beacon, Politico, WBUR, GBH News and local television newscasts. Just last week on our podcast, “What Works: The Future of Local News,” Ellen Clegg and I interviewed Alison Bethel, the chief content officer and editor-in-chief of State Affairs, yet another statehouse-focused news organization that is rolling out a Massachusetts edition in partnership with State House News.
Still, it’s a far cry from when the Statehouse press gallery was full of reporters hanging on every word from governors, legislative leaders and reform-minded rebels — that last category something that has virtually disappeared. Maybe if there were a few more reporters at the Statehouse keeping tabs on what’s going on, there would be a few more rebels as well.
More on the AP
The Associated Press is in the news for two other reasons today.
First, editors of the influential AP Stylebook have announced that they’re sticking with the Gulf of Mexico, despite President Trump’s insistence that it be called the Gulf of America, but that they’re following Trump’s lead in referring to Alaska’s Denali mountain as Mount McKinley, as it had been known previously.
The reason, the AP explains, is that the Gulf of Mexico name goes back 400 years and that the body of water is international. Denali, by contrast, is entirely within U.S. borders, and the president has the right to change its name by executive order, as President Barack Obama did in 2015.
Second, a new documentary film claims that AP photographer Nick Ut did not take an iconic, Pulitzer Prize-winning picture of a Vietnamese girl running naked from an American napalm attack, an image that may have hastened the end of the Vietnam War. The AP vociferously disagrees, saying that its own investigation shows Ut was indeed the photographer. Poynter media columnist Tom Jones has the details (fourth item).
On the new “What Works” podcast, Ellen Clegg and I talk with Alison Bethel, chief content officer and editor-in-chief for State Affairs. The project is a digital-first media company that is focused on covering state governments throughout the country. The target audience comprises political and policy professionals who need to have a deep understanding of the inner workings of government.
Alison was vice president of corps excellence at Report for America. She was also executive director of the Society of Professional Journalists, where she was only the second woman and the first person of color to serve in that capacity in 110 years.
I’ve got a Quick Take on a harrowing situation in Grand Junction, Colorado. A young Colorado television reporter was reportedly chased by a taxi driver who then attempted to choke him. The driver also allegedly yelled “This is Trump’s America now!”
Ellen has a Quick Take on an app called WatchDuty, which is providing lifesaving information to people in Los Angeles who are threatened by wildfires.
I find my Northeastern journalism ethics students’ analyses of the news fascinating and insightful, so I want to share with you their latest. I asked them to find a piece of journalism related to the inauguration — straight news, opinion, whatever — and share it along with some commentary of their own. They came up with a great mix of mainstream and alternative sources, and all of the pieces are worthwhile. It’s a small class, so I’m going to present the eight that I received plus one I thought was worth adding to the mix.
On day one, Trump pits his administration against transgender people, by Orion Rummler and Kate Sosin, The 19th. Student comment: “I think a lot of journalists and platforms will have to test the limits of our good friend neutral objectivity over the next four years, especially when it comes to reporting on the trans community. With trans rights being a popular and divisive issue right now, a lot of questions about objectivity come to mind…. If news organizations continue to give a lot of space to this ‘debate’ on trans rights (although trans people represent less than 2% of the US population), it almost validates the idea that there is a debate to be had on whether or not trans people deserve to exist.”
Three ways Democrats are breaking with tradition before inauguration,by James FitzGerald, BBC News. Student comment: “Democrats have emphasized the importance of peaceful transfers of power but are seemingly following in Trump’s footsteps by abandoning the traditions in place…. Democrats following Republicans’ lead in breaking with tradition could further destabilize democracy and the public’s trust in institutions.”
Pomp, Policy, and Pardons, by Jon Allsop, Columbia Journalism Review. Student comment: “I’m still burnt out from the first four years of Trump, to be honest, so I appreciate round-ups like this CJR one.”
Bishop Asks Trump to “Have Mercy” on Immigrants and Gay Children,by Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Tim Balk and Erica L. Green, New York Times. Student comment: “As member of LGBTIAQ+ community, hearing President Trump talk about taking away millions of people’s right, including my own, was dehumanizing…. It was courageous of the Bishop to speak out in that particular enviroment — most of the people invited might have been too afraid to do so — therefore I applaud her for that.”
Welcome Home, by Tom Scocca, Defector. Student comment: “What I enjoyed most from this article was its forthrightness. Scocca understands that getting to a point like this means that almost everyone, whether consciously or not, has played a part. To elide that while laying out ethical issues as they currently stand is itself unethical.”
6 takeaways from Trump’s inaugural address, by Aaron Blake, Washington Post. Student comment: “From the journalist’s perspective, I think fact-checking is a fundamental part of journalism, but it became even more critical under the Trump administration. Given his frequent use of misleading statements and false claims, journalists had a greater responsibility to verify information and contextualize his rhetoric.”
Trump’s Inauguration Speech Threatened New Depths of State Cruelty,by David Renton, Truthout. Student comment: “While I, personally, may not need a terrible amount of convincing to believe Trump’s intentions are cruel, I think this simple and concise piece would do a fine job of leading anyone to understand this underlying connection. That being said, most ardent supporters would likely entirely dismiss every claim. So maybe Renton is preaching to the choir.”
4 takeaways from Trump’s second inaugural address,by Domenico Montanaro, NPR. Student comment: “What caught my eye in the article is that Trump spoke of very specific plans for the next four years during his official address to the country. However, this was all on a script he read off a teleprompter. Later on, he gave a non-scripted speech to supporters to purposely reveal more plans. The questions I, as a journalist have, start with, if journalists have to be transparent with the public, why does the president not have to? Should a president not be held to a higher standard when dealing with the public? Why is Trump not being criticized more for this?”
And, finally, my own find:
The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, by Oliver Darcy, Status. My comment: “Darcy documents all the national media figures who’ve been highly critical of Donald Trump in the past but who rolled over for him on Monday…. I thought Darcy did a great job of combining reporting, opinion and attitude. By focusing on how the media covered the inauguration rather than the inauguration itself, he provided valuable insights into an aspect of the day that wasn’t center stage.”
Media notes
• Too much Trump? Joshua Benton, writing at Nieman Lab, introduces a daily newsletter from Vox that catches you up on the major Trump news of the day without wallowing in it. The Logoff, produced by a top Vox editor, Patrick Reiss, comprises one short item and then hands you off to something more uplifting at the close. I’ve signed up, and I think it will definitely be useful for some people, though it’s probably not enough for someone who needs to be immersed in the news — like Reiss, for instance. Or me.
• This was CNN. Mark Thompson, the news network’s chief executive, explains his plans to implement cuts on the broadcast side, beef up digital and stave of the apocalypse as the audience for linear TV continues to shrink and age. Thompson may have saved The New York Times in his last job. But based on what he says in his interview with the Times’ Benjamin Mullin (gift link), I’d say his mission to save CNN sounds infinitely more complex, and perhaps undoable.
• The end of social media. It is surely worth noting that all of our major social media platforms are now in thrall to Trump — Twitter/X, TikTok and Meta’s various services, which include Facebook, Instagram and Threads. Bluesky (where I’m most active these days) and Mastodon are barely a blip. Writing at 404 Media, Jason Koebler argues that what we need are decentralization combined with interoperability. It’s a great idea — and firmly rooted in a democratic vision for media that has been receding almost from the moment that the internet evolved into a mass medium.
