OPINION:
After officially declaring Easter Sunday “Transgender Day of Visibility,” a move that enraged evangelical Christians, Catholics and even Jews, President Biden insisted a day later that he “didn’t do that.”
Yet despite a post from his own presidential X account — an official presidential proclamation issued by the White House that was also displayed on official social media platforms — demonstratively showing Mr. Biden did indeed “do that,” the White House press corps went into action dutifully defending the president — and attacking Republicans for their anger.
“So, the criticism over the Transgender Day of Visibility, the White House said that the president wouldn’t abuse his faith for political purposes,” was how The Associated Press’ Will Weissert teed up the controversy for White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Monday. “Does the president think that’s what Republicans are doing on this?”
Ms. Jean-Pierre duly responded that fallout over the proclamation was based on “misinformation done on purpose” by Mr. Biden’s “cruel, hateful and dishonest” political foes and that the president would “never abuse his faith for political purposes or for profit.”
Apparently satisfied with that nonresponse, Mr. Weissert thanked the press secretary, and the rest of the complacent White House press corps never broached the subject again.
Media “fact-checkers” also had the president’s back. Mr. Biden did not “declare” Easter Sunday as Transgender Day of Visibility, despite the president’s own proclamation, they argued, because March 31 has already been recognized as International Transgender Day of Visibility since 2009. The two dates just happened to coincide this year.
It’s no surprise that Americans’ trust in the mass media’s reporting is at its lowest point in the history of Gallup polling, with 39% recently reporting that they have “no confidence at all” in the nation’s press corps.
But mainstream reporters’ serving as partisan mouthpieces didn’t start with Mr. Biden’s presidency. For that, you have to go back to the last Democrat to occupy the Oval Office.
Barack Obama, with his youthful charisma, intoxicating message of “hope and change,” and history-making status as the nation’s first Black president, captivated the hearts and minds of Washington’s elite press corps. You could say they got “thrills going up their legs” shilling for the progressive wunderkind.
Even Hillary Clinton noticed the change in the quality of press coverage when she was battling Mr. Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. In one primary debate, Mrs. Clinton referenced a “Saturday Night Live” skit about a love-struck media fawning over Mr. Obama while treating her as an obstacle in his way.
“I just find it curious if anybody saw ’Saturday Night Live,’ maybe we should ask Barack if he’s comfortable and needs another pillow,” Mrs. Clinton fumed on the debate stage.
It wasn’t just a rant from a sore loser: The Center for Media and Public Affairs reported that from mid-December 2007 to mid-February 2008, 83% of Mr. Obama’s coverage on network news telecasts was dotingly admirable — an unprecedented number.
During the general election campaign, media coverage was more positive than negative for Mr. Obama, whereas his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, was trashed. According to a Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism study, nearly 6 in 10 stories on McCain were decidedly negative, while fewer than 2 in 10 were positive.
Mr. Obama’s popularity with the Fourth Estate continued into his first 100 days in office, where he “enjoyed substantially more positive media coverage than either Bill Clinton or George W. Bush during their first months in the White House,” according to Pew.
The study found that positive stories about Mr. Obama outweighed the negative by 2-to-1 (42% vs. 20%), while 38% of the stories were neutral or mixed.
Mr. Obama was aware of his star appeal, joking at the 2009 White House Correspondents’ Dinner that “most of you covered me. All of you voted for me.”
Presidential accountability nearly vanished during Mr. Obama’s eight years in office. The press corps turned a blind eye when Mr. Obama illegally ignored treaties duly ratified by the Senate to investigate and prosecute torture, when he ordered the assassination of an American citizen in secret without due process, and when he waged an unprecedented war against government whistleblowers.
When Mr. Obama’s IRS targeted and tried to suppress conservative groups, the mainstream media yawned. When Mr. Obama’s Justice Department spied on the AP — collecting two months’ worth of reporters’ phone records — the press accepted it.
So is it any surprise that Mr. Biden — Mr. Obama’s loyal vice president for those eight years — isn’t being held to account for his catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan, for the deaths of U.S. service members abroad, or his handling of the illegal invasion of our southern border?
As in Mr. Obama’s administration, when concerned parents or pro-life activists are targeted, the press deems it a right-wing conspiracy not worthy of coverage. When evidence surfaces that Mr. Biden’s White House is working to censor and curtail Americans’ free speech on social media platforms, the media looks the other way because it’s conservatives who are mostly the targets.
Mr. Biden’s White House gets a major break on policy issues as well. Higher inflation? Don’t worry, it’s transitory. Unprecedented southern border crossings? The border is secure, and it is Congress’ fault. Rising gas prices? Obviously, it’s because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Increased crime? Only a concern in conservative circles. Mr. Biden’s cognitive decline? Don’t ask, ignore.
Donald Trump, by contrast, is the devil, a threat to democracy, a dictator worse than Hitler, the Antichrist, according to the dominant media perspective these days.
If you only listen to the mainstream media, these are the narratives you’ll hear (or won’t hear). But don’t blame Mr. Biden for the Fourth Estate’s corruption. Blame Mr. Obama. It started under him.
• Kelly Sadler is the commentary editor at The Washington Times.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.