We need hard truths and tough reporting, not 'both-sides-equal' trash

Those who were glad to see 2025 end because it was such an awful year for American democracy can’t be feeling too good right now.

Just 12 days later, we’re in an even worse state. The Trump regime has kidnapped the Venezuelan leader, killing dozens and illegally claiming dominion over that country, and threatening to move on to other countries.

An ICE agent has killed an unarmed civilian — a mother of three — in Minnesota. And years after the Trump-fueled attack on the U.S. Capitol, the lies about what happened there continue to circulate — including in the mainstream media.

Journalists should be telling these disastrous and consequential stories with clarity, tough reporting and a reliance on verifiable facts.

Thankfully, some of that is happening, and I’ll give a few examples in a moment. But first, I have to draw your attention to — and express my disgust at — the way the Jan. 6, 2021 anniversary was portrayed on CBS Evening News. It was almost kissed off altogether, but the attention it did get was rife with appalling “both sides are equal” commentary.

“President Trump accused Democrats of failing to prevent the attack. Hakeem Jeffries accused Trump of whitewashing it,” was the summation by newly installed anchor Tony Dokoupil, as images of the Trump faithful hoisting banners that thanked him for their pardons played in the background.

That’s what this is about? Both sides equal?

“SHAMEFUL,” was the response of Larry Sabato, who runs the nonpartisan Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

He’s right, of course. And the broader context makes it even worse.

“Dokoupil’s disgraceful framing served as a reminder that Larry Ellison, the billionaire Oracle co-founder who bankrolled his son’s takeover of CBS News’ parent company, Paramount, assisted Trump’s efforts to try to overturn the 2020 election,” was the apt reminder from Jon Passantino of the Status newsletter.

My Guardian colleague Jeremy Barr looked at the anchor’s first week on the job, which was mostly an embarrassment to the legacy of the storied network, despite his relatively strong interview with border czar Tom Homan.

In extreme contrast to the willful ignorance of the facts is the effort to seek the truth on the news of the day, which I saw in a number of places.

First, kudos to the local newspaper, the Minnesota Star Tribune, which has been under attack but has withstood the pressure steadily and continued reporting. Its stalwart presence underlines the sadness of this week’s announcement that the remaining Pittsburgh daily, the Post-Gazette, will close its doors in a few months; it’s a brutal development, leaving a major American city without a newspaper. I was also sorry to learn that due to the cutback in federal funding, PBS had been forced to eliminate PBS News Weekend, which aired its final broadcast on Sunday. The losses just keep coming.

I was impressed with the Wall Street Journal’s deep look into the ICE shootings. With the headline “Videos Show How ICE Vehicle Stops Can Escalate to Shootings,” this was a timely investigation that had the guts to draw some conclusions, as they identified “13 instances of agents firing at or into civilian vehicles since July, leaving at least eight people shot with two confirmed dead. Only one civilian was armed — with a concealed weapon that was never drawn.”

And the tactics are clear.

“The Minneapolis shooting shares characteristics with others the Journal reviewed: Agents box in a vehicle, try to remove an individual, block attempts to flee, then fire.” This is in direct opposition to widely accepted law enforcement standards for conducting traffic stops safely and effectively.

The Journal is cautious and meticulous about verification, so you can take it to the bank when they publish something like this. And that’s what I mean about hard truths and tough reporting.

I was also glad to see a quick turnaround by the New York Times analyzing the Minnesota horror by looking at bystander footage from many different angles. And the headline was clear: “Videos Contradict Trump Administration’s Account of ICE Shooting in Minneapolis.” Here’s a link so you can see for yourself.

As for commentary, I don’t think there was a better piece this week than one in the Atlantic by Peter Wehner, titled “Trump’s Folly.” Taking a long historical view, he writes that under Trump, America has lost its soul.

“In Donald Trump’s America, the law of the jungle rules. The strong do what they can; the weak do what they must.”

And he writes: “The United States under Trump is dark, aggressive and lawless. It has become … a predator nation. This period of our history will eventually be judged, and the verdict will be unforgiving.”

Sometimes, it’s a relief just to have things stated with such force and clarity.

I also admired Robert Reich, as always. His Substack, to me, is indispensable because of his moral compass and his command of each situation as it arises, based in part on his history as a top government official. He appropriately drew a direct through-line from Jan. 6, 2021 to our present lawless moment.

Jake Tapper at CNN conducted an appropriately tough interview with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, challenging her on many of her relentless and shameless lies about Jan. 6th and the Minnesota shooting. “I just showed you video of people attacking the law enforcement officers,” Tapper pushed back when Noem claimed that laws are enforced equally under the Trump administration. “It’s just not true. There’s a different standard for law enforcement officers being attacked if they’re being attacked by Trump supporters.”

It takes guts to do all of this. And it must be done. Because that is the job of journalism, especially at such a crucial moment. Not squishy talk about how everyone needs to get along, or how both sides — truth and lies — are deserving of attention.

Readers, it’s a deeply upsetting time. The only way out of this hellscape is holding fast to the truth, and remembering the line from George Orwell’s 1984: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

Thank you for being here, for your perceptive comments, and for your encouragement and support. All of these mean a lot to me, and will keep me on the case as I try to call journalists to their highest purpose, and to point out when they get it wrong. Please let me know how you are reacting to the events of 2026, and how you think the media is handling them.

Finally, here’s why one reader chose to become a paid subscriber, and some information for newcomers here, who are warmly welcomed.

 

My background: I am a Lackawanna, NY native who started my career as a summer intern at the Buffalo News, my hometown daily. After years as a reporter and editor, I was named the paper’s first woman editor in chief in 1999, and ran the 200-person newsroom for almost 13 years. Starting in 2012, I served as the first woman “public editor” of the New York Times — an internal media critic and reader representative — and later was the media columnist for the Washington Post. These days, I write here on Substack, as well as for the Guardian US. I’ve also written two books, taught journalism ethics, and won a few awards, including three for defending First Amendment principles.

The purpose of ‘American Crisis’: My aim is to use this newsletter (it started as a podcast in 2023) to push for the kind of journalism we need for our democracy to function — journalism that is accurate, fair, mission-driven and public-spirited. That means that I point out the media’s flaws and failures when necessary.

What I ask of you: Last fall, I removed the paywall so that everyone could read and comment. I thought it was important in this dire moment and might be helpful. If you are able to subscribe at $50 a year or $8 a month, or upgrade your unpaid subscription, that will help to support this venture — and keep it going for all. Thank you!

Leave a comment