Ariana Baio and Maanvi Singh / The Guardian US / Sept. 21, 2026
The major US television news outlets agreed to suspend their video coverage of Donald Trump after the administration banned journalists from several outlets from entering the White House grounds.
The collective decision came after the barred outlets – CNN, MS Now and Politico – sued the administration on Monday, saying the president’s actions were a violation of their first amendment rights.
The ban was an extraordinary escalation of Trump’s battle against news outlets. After a coalition of networks including ABC, CBS, Fox News and NBC – which along with CNN form a press “pool” that share the responsibilities of capturing and distributing footage of the president carried by news outlets worldwide – announced they would cease coverage in solidarity with the barred outlets, the White House promoted its own feed online, branding it “Trump TV”. The channel purported to show “top past moments, announcements, and the latest and greatest from the administration all in one place”.
It is extremely rare for a president to travel or make public appearances without the accompaniment of a representative from the White House television pool. Network cameras have provided coverage of the president since 1950.
On Monday, the ban against CNN meant that no broadcaster was covering Trump’s midday ribbon-cutting to unveil a new White House helipad. Although the White House provided a livestream, without professional boom mics and audio setup, the president’s remarks were inaudible over the sounds of a helicopter’s engine running in the background.
The president abruptly announced his ban against outlets this weekend in a Truth Social post, saying he had enough of “purposely negative stories” about him. Journalists had their press badges confiscated by Secret Service on Saturday.
“Effective today, the TV pool will not be covering events designated as pool coverage of the President,” Bryan Boughton, Fox News’s Washington bureau chief who is also currently serving on as TV pool chair, wrote in an email to pool members Monday. The role is rotated each quarter. “This follows the White House’s position preventing CNN from fulfilling its assigned pool duties,” said Boughton.
In a show of support with the banned outlets, several outlets, including the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Associated Press, said they would not publish or distribute images taken as part of the White House photography pool including Trump’s departure on Marine One and his events at the United Nations in New York, until midnight ET. In a statement, the Washington Post described the action as part of a “collective effort”.
The five news networks, including CNN, wrote in a joint statement: “The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government. No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting.”
Although the broadcast networks said they would withhold televised coverage, the print, radio and wire service press pool continues to provide reports detailing Trump’s movements throughout the day.
Hours after the broadcast networks’ announcement, the Washington Post said it would also withhold its photographs of presidential events from being published until after midnight ET to support banned outlets.
On Friday, Trump abruptly announced he was banning CNN, Politico and MS Now from the White House because, he believes, they “constantly write or report FICTION and LIES”. On Saturday, reporters and other staff from the news organizations were denied access to the White House.
Other media outlets and first amendment advocacy groups responded by condemning Trump’s ban, calling it an infringement on the right to a free press.
On Monday, CNN, Politico and MS Now filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, asking a federal judge to temporarily block the enforcement of the ban and restore the reporters’ passes to the White House.
On Truth Social, Trump defended his decisions, insisting that his ban was not “instituting an assault on the Free Press”, but instead addressing “national security” threats – a claim the US president has recently used to justify building a triumphal arch and the White House ballroom.
Does anyone else see this as a breakdown in our society ?
I’m sure there is no shortage of people ready to blame Trump exclusively, and he certainly is responsible for much of it.
But is he responsible for all of it ? Doesn’t it “take two to tango” ?
In my personal observation, television media transitioned from being a trusted source of information in the 1960s to the farcical, 3 ring circus it is today completely because of money.
The FCC requires all broadcasters to operate “in the public interest”. For a good laugh, see their reminder published earlier this year at:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-530A1.txt
There’s not a station I know of that fits the bill. Because they all require “viewer support” in some form or another. Watch their ads, donate to their fundraisers, buy their streaming subscriptions, etc. They are all about making money, and not simply a reasonable profit which no one would deny them.
No, the “biggies” are all about ratings, sweeps weeks, awards, etc … anything that lets them charge more.
And the truth ?
“What is truth ?” (Pontius Pilate, 33AD)
“You can’t handle the truth !” (Colonel Jessop, 1982)
We all have our versions of “truth”, and anyone else’s version is an uncomfortable one.
In light of this, isn’t The Media’s responsibility to report what is known, what is verifiably true ? And if there are multiple “truths” to report them equally, without bias as much as is possible ?
Yet somewhere along in the 70s The Media decided this wasn’t good enough, and realizing its power, it changed its mission from reporting the news to shaping and interpreting the news. The reporters became active participants rather than impartial observers.
We find it acceptable when a film crew documenting wildlife fails to intervene to protect the film’s protagonist. It may break our hearts, but we “allow nature to takes its course”.
But this approach has long ago been abandoned in US “journalism”.
HuffPost, Mother Jones, The Guardian (source of this article) – impartial and unbiased ?
OAN, Newsmax, New York Post – impartial and unbiased ?
Hardly.
OK, none of those are TV stations, I referenced them to illustrate the point (plus the article is from the Guardian)
You think CNN is unbiased ? What about Fox News ?
The fact is they all suck ! They are nothing more than echo chambers for the unthinking masses, who are willing to have their beliefs and opinions handed to them. Left and right, they’re both the same.
The Media has lost respect for the Office of the President because they have no respect for the holder of the office. You dislike Trump ? I can’t argue too much with you, he has done an awful lot to earn the dislike.
But if you are a news organization operating in the public interest, it is YOUR OBLIGATION to cover the Presidency, and yes that includes the President himself.
So where is this escalation going ? No one will cover the president ? He’ll offer us “Trump TV” ? WTF people, this is real life and not some stupid scripted drama series.
What we need going forward is for the cameras to show not only the president but the media in attendance as well. Show us the media buffoons who try to “be the story”, who want to embarrass the president and make themselves look cool in the process. Trust me, Trump doesn’t need any help in this regard, he is perfectly capable of embarrassing himself as we have seen.
But if the media can’t take the high road and perform in a professional manner, kick ’em out and hold them responsible for failing in their duties, just as they are ever so willing to hold the president accountable for his failings.
Have to disagree some, Robert; the major TV stations holding back their collective service is one of the best things the media has done recently. But it’s true that many of them handed Trump plenty of air time in the beginning. Some of what you’re saying is ‘a pox of all your (media) houses’ and blaming the messengers for the message. You’re worried about Trump being embarrassed as he bans the media from the White House? What about the rest of us? How do you exactly kick the media out and not be like Trump? Sounds like you want it both ways.
Trouble is they haven’t been holding Trump accountable for his failings enough. Why did it take service members filming destroyed buildings and equipment in the Middle East to get the word out about how the public has been lied to?
I disagree completely that the major TV stations refusing to perform their duty is in any way acceptable.
The issue I raise is not the question of what Trump deserves or doesn’t deserve. He is only the accidental focus here. The issue is do the TV stations get to pick and choose what the like to report on or do that have a duty to report ?
“The people have a right to know !”
How many times do they trot this old saw out when they want access ? Yet when it suits their own purposes the concept is kicked to the curb.
Trump is nothing but a distraction in this issue. He may be the catalyst, but the self-serving TV media has long since betrayed the public interest in the United States, and a quick read of the FCC comments I references should either have one rolling in the aisles laughing, or burning with shame.
Again, I am not defending Trump giving CNN the boot though I feel like I may understand why he did so. Do you remember the time back in the 80s when Sam Donaldson whipped the old joke on President Reagan about the percentage of men who sing in the shower ? It was funny, but it was disrespectful to the Office.
Now, if you are witness to the entirely of the press briefings, and you see the manner in which the CNNs “ask questions”, you begin to feel that there should be limits on comportment, that professionalism should be paramount. Dislike of the sitting president should not be an excuse.
And of course, the TV stations join in lockstep as if they were some beleagured and oppressed minority. It is this that gets my own dander up. We trust them to do a job, and they get so wrapped up in their own self-importance that they can’t get ‘er done anymore :-(
You ask “What about the rest of us?” If you mean The Rag, and other/all media, there is simply no comparison between televised media and print media. Second, media credentials are revoked when members don;t follow the established norms. Nothing prevents that story from being reported, and perhaps that would be the appropriate method for dealing with Trump.
But walking out like babies … “It’s our football and we’re going home” ???
The purpose of television news is not to report the truth. It is to attract eyeballs to sell products. Start from there…
Yes, this is it exactly.
Thus “TV News” is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. Apart from Entertainment Tonight which comes as close to “truth in advertising” as you are gonna get from the TV media platform.
A couple of things here. Until the mid 1970s News on the 3 major networks and local stations was considered a public service, a “loss leader”
If you will. In the mid 70s increasingly detailed audience research showed advertisers the quality of that audience (older, wealthier,) and they flocked to it. News became its own profit center, driven by ratings. Then the Reagan administration eliminated The Fairness Doctrine. Now all bets on fairness and equal time were off. The real effect was the development of outlets whose stock in trade was controversy. As we’ve all learned, vitriol sells. Advertiser revenue was siphoned from the broadcasters. Then came Section 203 which allows digital news “aggregators” ( which now includes Meta, You Tube, X, and the like) liability protection from the content they distribute. All of this makes the concept of “News,” much more of a free for all than ever before. I still think the broadcasters try to do a credible job of distributing news and information, but they are caught up in this storm and do need to make money to survive. As far as bias goes, the minute a human being (reporter, editor, anchor, news director) touches a story it will have some bias. It’s our job as consumers to wade through all this to come to informed decisions. It’s called Critical Thinking”.
Exactly, Chaz, the demise of The Fairness Doctrine was a huge step backward from TV media operating in the public interest. They changed it to mean “what the public is interested in” to instead mean “enquiring minds want to know”.
While Section 203 is another major event, it is in the domain of digital content, and TV media is the focus of this story.
I agree that as humans, no one is bias free, but it seems clear that the majority of TV broadcasters no longer even make the attempt to be even-handed. Instead they shamelessly pander to their specific demographics, CNN and Fox being two of the most egregrious.
You may feel it is “our job” as consumers to sort through the available presentation with a discerning and critical eye. Absolving TV media from responsible reporting creates a caveat emptor approach that holds the door wide open for intentional manipulation of the public (which is where I believe we are now). Is it no longer the media’s “job” to report responsibly ? They can say what they want because it’s our job as consumers to discern when they are full of crap ?
“We all know that crap is king” (Don Henley, Dirty Laundry, 1982)
Perhaps it is simply taken for granted how much television influences us, how much our “modern opinions” are shaped by the slick narrative of television. This is readily observed in the advertising styles that have long since abandoned any factual representation of product in favor of “selling the lifestyle”. The fact that this all took place in the 60s and 70s apparently results in complete acceptance as we have become so used to it.
My point is that we should not now, nor should we ever allow that to become the norm for television programming that labels itself “news”