Several Fox News journalists and commentators criticized President Donald Trump’s decision Friday to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, warning that the move sets a bad precedent and is unlikely to produce better coverage.
Trump announced the ban on Truth Social, writing, “Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States, the Trump Administration, or the United States of America,” while promising, “Other Fake News Media Outlets to follow.” Speaking later in the Oval Office, he suggested The New York Times and The Washington Post could be next. “I mean, they’re disgusting,” he said. “I don’t get it. Why would they be? You know, we’re doing so well, and they’ll take the most positive story and make it as negative as possible.”
The decision quickly drew criticism from several figures at Fox News. White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich, who also serves as president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, released a WHCA statement arguing that the administration was improperly tying access to its view of an outlet’s coverage, according to Mediate.
“The president said it plainly in the Oval Office, describing his own planned action as a ‘ban on the free press.’
The Constitution protects the freedom of the press from government interference. That protection does not depend on whether the president likes a news organization’s coverage, agrees with its reporting, or approves of the questions its journalists ask.
This is about more than the rights of journalists. It is about the right of the American people to receive a full and independent account of the activities, policies and decisions of whoever occupies the nation’s highest office.
The WHCA stands in defense of our colleagues at CNN, MSNOW, and Politico who are being singled out for doing their jobs.”
Other Fox figures invoked both precedent and the practical effect of the ban. John Roberts, co-host of Fox’s “America Reports,” pointed to the Obama administration’s attempt to exclude Fox from some White House access in 2009. “Obama tried to exclude Fox from certain White House access back in 2009. Lasted about a half a heartbeat. I expect this one will too.” Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley called the ban “an assault on long-honored principles of a free press,” while Fox News chief political analyst Brit Hume shared Turley’s comments and added: “100%. And If he thinks this will lead to more favorable coverage, I think he’s dreaming.”
Former White House press secretary and Fox News contributor Ari Fleischer said he shared Trump’s complaints about parts of the press but argued that exclusion was the wrong response. “I agree with POTUS that several media outlets covering the WH are biased and unfair. Banning them from the WH is not the solution. Open the pool and the briefing room to conservatives. Challenge liberal reporters. Argue and defeat them. Don’t ban them. Or one day they’ll ban us.”
Fox News political analyst Guy Benson similarly called the move counterproductive. “The WH media ban, even if you hate the targeted outlets, is a bad idea & bad precedent. It’s the sort of thing he does when he doesn’t feel like things are going well politically. Beyond his hardcore loyalist base, it achieves nothing and is exhausting.”
The criticism continued Friday on “Special Report,” where Fox News radio political analyst Josh Kraushaar said the dispute risked distracting from other issues and making Trump “look angry.” “Look, I don’t think it’s a good signal of what the president should be focused on,” he said. “He needs to be focused like a laser on the economy, foreign policy with the U.N. meetings next week. And he’s talking about banning media outlets. It’s not good. I don’t think there’s a legal case to be made against it. But certainly politically, it makes him look angry at tough coverage at a time when people are worried about the direction of the country.”
