They're Coming for . . . the Journalists

The Threat of Donald Trump & Project 2025 to Journalists and a Free Press

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller

Hi, everyone. I’m Mike Palmer. Today, I’m chatting with Jennifer, our fictional journalist, and Miles, our fictional teacher, about the threat Donald Trump and Project 2025 pose to journalists and a free press in the United States.

Jennifer: Hi, everyone.

Miles: Hello. I’m happy to be here again.

Mike: We’re going to start by talking about what Donald Trump said and did during his Presidency to intimidate and neutralize journalists and the media. Jennifer do you recall the incident with Jim Acosta at a White Press Conference?

Jennifer: I sure do. During a White House press conference in November 2018, CNN’s Jim Acosta was asking a follow-up question of President Trump when a White House aide tried to grab the microphone out of his hand. The situation escalated as Acosta held onto the microphone, leading to a brief physical struggle. Subsequently, the White House revoked Acosta's press pass, claiming that he had behaved inappropriately.

Miles: Wow. I had forgotten about that. What happened after that?

Jennifer: Well, CNN and Acosta filed suit, claiming that the White House action violated Acosta’s free speech rights under the First Amendment, and the court ordered the White House to reinstate his press credentials.

THE PROBLEM

Mike: Thanks, Jennifer. Miles can you tell us a bit about how Donald Trump has talked about and acted toward journalists and the press generally?

Miles: Sure. During his presidency, Donald Trump frequently called the media “the enemy of the people,” a phrase lifted from other autocrats designed to suppress dissent, control information, and maintain power by discrediting and attacking the free press. This rhetoric was not just about expressing dissatisfaction with the press. It was about delegitimizing journalists and media organizations that criticized his administration. It had the effect of inciting violent followers to attack journalists.

Mike: Yes. I remember that. In addition to the revocation of Jim Acosta’s press credentials we talked about earlier, Trump’s attacks on the media included:

Public Denunciations: Trump’s speeches and tweets often targeted specific journalists and news organizations, calling them “fake news” and questioning their integrity.¹ This constant barrage of criticism created an environment of hostility and mistrust towards the press.

Encouraging Violence Against Journalists: Trump’s rhetoric sometimes went beyond verbal attacks, as seen in his rallies where he encouraged crowds to boo and jeer at journalists and to attack them physically with promises to pay the attackers legal bills. There were instances where Trump supporters physically attacked journalists, emboldened by the president’s antagonistic stance.

Defamation Lawsuits: Trump personally and through his administration threatened or initiated defamation lawsuits against media organizations and journalists. Often lacking any legal basis, these lawsuits served to intimidate specific journalists and to chill aggressive reporting generally.

Threats to Conduct Espionage Act Prosecutions: The administration considered using the Espionage Act to prosecute journalists and their sources, particularly in cases involving leaked information. This approach, reminiscent of tactics used during previous crackdowns on whistleblowers, further threatened the ability of the press to hold the government accountable.

Miles: That’s pretty bad stuff, all right. Jennifer, as a journalist, how does that make you feel?

Jennifer: Frankly, Miles, while I’d like to think I will continue reporting the facts as vigorously as ever, I don’t work for a big newspaper or network. And I support two kids. The thought of what even a defamation suit would do to me and my family is scary.

THE ATTACK ON THE PRESS IS NOT NEW

Mike: I understand. The whole point of these intimidation tactics is to get you and other journalists to be less aggressive and more compliant with whatever those in power want you to report and print.

Miles: Yeah, throughout the 20^th Century, autocrats and dictators sought to suppress or eliminate a free press. This happened in Nazi Germany (1933-1945), the Soviet Union (1917-1991), China (1949-present), and East Germany (1948-1989). Similar stories are unfolding in Turkey (2002-present), Hungary (2010-present), Egypt (2013-present), and Russia (2000-present) right now.²

Jennifer: So, imagine a whistleblower has given you a tip about illegal activity in the State Department. Shortly before you’re ready to publish a story, you learn that the whistleblower has died under suspicious circumstances. You get a call with a threatening voice telling you to “drop the story or else.” You publish anyway. Three days later, you’re arrested on charges of espionage. Such things happen in Egypt, Russia, and Hungary. They could happen here too.

WHY A FREE PRESS IS IMPORTANT: THE ROLE OF TRUTH IN A DEMOCRACY

Mike: Some people may be wondering why a free press is so important?

Miles: Yeah. I sometimes get that question from young students in the classroom. We sometimes take it for granted that a free and vigorous press is good for democracy. But students sometimes wonder whether it’s all that important.

Jennifer: So, what do you tell them? How do you explain why a democracy needs a free press?

Miles: Well, I tell them that truth is the indispensable foundation of any society, from the smallest family to a baseball team to a church to a business organization to legislative bodies and on to the whole country.

Mike: Why is this so?

Miles: All societies are formed through communication, the process of exchanging information and opinions through listening, talking, understanding. Without a basic level of coherence and rationality, communication does not work. Coherence and rationality rely on a correspondence between what we assert and the way things are in fact—that is, truth.

Without truth, we devolve into an Alice-in-Wonderland world in which nothing is reliable. Nothing is stable. Nothing is predictable. There is no order. Chaos ensues.

No complex society is able to know the truth from first-hand experience alone. We rely on others to tell us things we don’t and can’t know directly. If we can’t trust them to tell us what they believe to be true based on a rigorous investigation, then society crumbles into a heap of lies and dishonesty. There is no truth. Chaos ensues.

Mike: Thanks for the philosophy lesson, but where do journalists come into this picture?

Miles: Well, for hundreds of years, we have relied on journalists to be the primary gatherers and distributors of accurate evidence and facts about the world. They dig it up. They report it. As with science, competition among journalists and cross-critiques of reporters help keep the enterprise accurate. We trust the press, not because individual journalists are paragons of accuracy. We trust the press because a vigorous competition among journalists helps correct error.

In the United States, the government does not attempt to regulate journalists, media organizations, or journalism even when some participants are not just inaccurate but are blatantly, unabashedly lying—even when, as sometimes happens—they intend to deceive us.

Jennifer: Yeah, well Donald Trump is notorious for his blatant disregard for the truth, an attitude that infected the White House Communications Office as well. Remember White House Press Secretaries Sean Spicer and Sarah Huckabee Sanders lying to the White House Press Corps?³ Or Kelleyanne Conway’s “alternative facts?”⁴ That may be child’s play compared with the lies that lie ahead if Donald Trump is re-elected.

Mike: Why not pass a law against bad speech? I mean, if truth is important, journalists shouldn’t be publishing lies.

Jennifer: Let me answer that. I learned this in journalism school. There’s this famous opinion by Justice Brandeis in a 1927 Supreme Court case in which he wrote, “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”

The notion is that bad ideas, inaccuracies, and lies will be corrected in the marketplace of ideas, as Justice Holmes put it in his 1919 dissent in the Abrams case.

Mike: Yeah. That may not always work in practice. As C.H. Spurgeon said in 1859, “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on.” But I get your point.

Jennifer: Over the decades, we have come to understand that a free press is central to all other freedoms and to our democracy. And that principle is stated in the First Amendment to the Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The Roman poet, Juvenal (55-127 CE), asked, “quis custodiet ipsos custodes (who guards the guards themselves)?” Who protects us from the state? Well, in the first instance, it’s journalists.

HOW TRUMP AND PROJECT 2025 WILL SUBVERT A FREE PRESS

Miles: So, I agree that journalists and a free press are important because they find and report the truth. How do Donald Trump and Project 2025 constitute a threat to a free press? I mean, Donald Trump tried to intimidate journalists and media outlets in his first presidency without much success. What makes you think he’ll do any better in a second term?

Mike: You’re saying we may be getting more alarmed than justified? So let me explain how they will put duct tape over Jennifer’s mouth and shut up every other journalist who needs to make a living.

In Hungary and Turkey, Viktor Orban and Recep Erdogan used the prosecutorial and judicial arms of the state to suppress the press.

Project 2025 seeks to intimidate and control a free press more systematically by installing employees loyal only to Donald Trump to do his bidding in all federal agencies, including communications offices.

Jennifer: And Donald Trump has made no bones about his intention to undermine truth and corrupt public discourse by using the Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue Service, and other federal agencies to harass, intimidate, prosecute, and ultimately eliminate independent journalism.

Mike: That’s right, Jennifer. According to Donald Trump, the President has the power to “do whatever I want.” This notion stems from the Unitary Executive Theory, which animates Project 2025.

In Trump’s mind and that of many of his followers, he is not constrained by Congress or the Constitution’s protection of “freedom of speech, or of the press.” From his perspective, the First Amendment applies only to Congress, not the President. In its recent ruling in Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court has given the President carte blanche to do whatever he likes with impunity.

So, by this logic, the President can use agencies of the federal government to bring a free press to heel if he wants to. And, as we’ve seen, he wants to.

If an Attorney General, FBI Director, or IRS Commissioner refuses to carry out his orders, he can just remove and replace them.

Jennifer: Yes, and Donald Trump has made no secret that he intends to use the Department of Justice to prosecute “his enemies.” Richard Nixon had an “enemies list,” too, which included journalists Daniel Schorr and Mary McGrory. And Nixon used the IRS to harass and intimidate people on the list. We can expect Trump to do the same and worse to contemporary journalists.

Mike: The subversion of a free press is likely to occur both through overt intimidation, harassment, prosecution, and civil lawsuits and, more insidiously, through the propagation of lies and disinformation by the communications officers of the various federal agencies. We saw this during the first Trump Presidency. It will likely be more widespread in a second go round.

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS ALREADY WEAK IN THE UNITED STATES

Jennifer: And Miles, it’s important to understand that press freedom in the United States is already on shaky footing. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) assesses press freedom in 180 countries, using a five-part index on a scale of 1 to 100, and ranks all countries. With a total score of 66.59, the United States ranks 55^th—55^th!--after countries like Slovenia, Romania, Poland, and Ghana. We’re worse than Ghana for crying out loud. Reporters Without Borders concludes that “major structural barriers to press freedom persist in [the United States], once considered a model for freedom of expression.”

The map of press freedom worldwide is not pretty:

Green is a good situation. Only 9 countries meet that grade. A few more, including Canada, qualify for “satisfactory situation” status. The United States receives a grade of “problematic situation,” along with slightly more than 20 countries.

Donald Trump and Project 2025 almost certainly will make our already precarious situation worse. We could even slide down to “difficult situation” status.

PROJECT 2025’S LIKELY IMPACT ON JOURNALISTS AND THE MEDIA

Mike: Thanks, Jennifer. Let’s turn to the impact Project 2025 could have on journalists and the media.

The first effect is censorship and control.

As I said before, Project 2025 sees the President as having dictatorial powers over all agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission. The FCC Chairman has significant power to act alone. There is cause for concern, therefore, that the President will tell the Chairman to harass, intimidate, or shake down a broadcaster or other entity subject to FCC regulation to get that broadcaster to squelch reporting or even to report biased or false stories.

The second effect concerns policy changes:

Project 2025 recommends revoking the noncommercial educational (NCE) status of NPR and PBS, which would result in higher operational costs and potential downsizing or closure of these outlets. This policy change is aimed at reducing what the document describes as leftist propaganda, further curtailing media diversity and independence.

Donald Trump has also suggested he would push for further deregulation and consolidation in the media industry, which could reduce competition and increase control over media narratives by a few large corporations, which could be subjected to government control or intimidation.

Miles: Project 2025 could also have an effect on policies. The broader implications of these policies include a chilling effect on press freedom. By targeting funding and regulatory protections, Project 2025 indirectly pressures media organizations to self-censor to avoid financial and operational difficulties.

There would be cascading effects. These measures would likely lead to an even greater homogenization of media narratives than we have now. Only those aligned with government perspectives would be able to thrive. The shriveling of diverse viewpoints would undermine the foundational principles of a free press in our society.

Mike: We can also expect increased legal repression. As I described above, Donald Trump has indicated that he will continue to take aggressive actions against the media, including revising defamation rules to make it easier to sue news organizations for negative coverage. In recent rulings, six members of the Supreme Court have shown a willingness to discard long-established rules and might be persuaded to overrule New York Times v. Sullivan, which protects journalists against defamation suits by public figures. This would further entrench a culture of fear and self-censorship among journalists.

Donald Trump has also suggested he would push for further deregulation and consolidation in the media industry, which could reduce competition and increase control over media narratives by a few large, government-friendly corporations.

Jennifer: Donald Trump Plus Project 2025 are also likely to undermine the Rule of Law and democratic norms, for example, through legal overreach.

The proposed policies and actions exceed traditional legal boundaries by aggressively targeting and undermining independent media. Such overreach distorts legal principles designed to protect press freedom and the public’s right to information.

By weakening institutions that provide checks on government power, such as an independent press, Project 2025 and Trump's actions threaten the balance of power that is essential for a functioning democracy.

Miles: And don’t forget the suppression of dissent. The suppression of dissenting voices and the curtailment of free expression through media control contradict democratic norms that value diverse perspectives and open debate.

Jennifer: So, it seems clear that the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press is under direct threat from the policies and rhetoric espoused by Project 2025 and Trump’s approach to governance.

CALL TO ACTION

Mike: Thanks, Jennifer and Miles, for participating in this chat about Donald Trump, Project 2025, and Freedom of the Press. I’m sure listeners are wondering what they can do to help prevent a further decline in press freedom.

Well, first, stay informed:

Subscribe to the Stop Project 2025 Substack for updates and analyses on these critical issues. And check out the other websites we recommend.

Second, raise awareness:

Share this essay and other materials with your network to inform and mobilize others about the threats to press freedom.

Third, engage politically:

Contact your representatives, participate in town halls, and support advocacy groups that defend journalistic freedoms and democratic values.

Fourth, support independent institutions:

Donate to and support independent media, educational institutions, and organizations upholding democratic principles.

And finally, vote:

Ensure you are registered to vote and encourage others to do the same to protect our democracy.

CONCLUSION

The stakes are high, and the likely impact of Project 2025 Plus Trump on journalists and the media cannot be overstated. By understanding the threats and taking action, we can work together to preserve the freedoms that define our society.

I’m Mike Palmer. Thanks for listening. See you next time.

1. See, e.g., “The Fake News Media is the true Enemy of the People,” Donald Trump, tweet from February 2019. With roots going back to the French Revolution (ennemi du people), some variant of the phrase “enemy of the people,” applied to the press and others, has been used extensively by Joseph Stalin (Soviet Union), Adolf Hitler (Nazi Germany), Mao Zedong (China), Nicolae Ceaușescu (Romania), Kim Jong-un (North Korea), and Vladimir Putin (Russia).

2. See, e.g., “Turkey,” Freedom House (2024); Ece Temelkuran, Turkey: The Insane and the Melancholy (Zed Books, 2016); “Hungary,” Freedom House (2024); “Egypt,” Freedom House (2024); “Freedom of the Press 2017 – Egypt,” Freedom House (April 28, 2017);  “Russia,” Freedom House (2024); Anna Politkovskaya, Putin's Russia: Life in a Failing Democracy (Henry Holt & Co., 2007). Politkovskaya was assassinated in 2006 before her book was published. In each country, autocrats and dictators used the police and judicial institutions to jail and murder journalists and others who expressed any dissent from or criticism of the ruling regime.

3. For example, on January 21, 2017, Sean Spicer claimed that the crowd at President Trump’s inauguration was the largest ever. Photographic evidence and public transportation data showed that the crowd size was significantly smaller than at previous inaugurations, including President Obama’s in 2009. On January 24, 2017, Spicer reiterated President Trump’s baseless claim that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election. There was no evidence to support the claim of widespread voter fraud in the 2016 election, and numerous studies and investigations found no significant voter fraud. On May 10, 2017, Sarah Huckabee Sanders claimed that the rank and file of the FBI had lost confidence in James Comey, which was a key reason for his firing. Multiple reports indicated that many FBI agents respected and supported Comey. Later, under oath, Sanders admitted that her claim about hearing from countless members of the FBI was not based on any facts. Also on May 10, 2017, Sanders said that “countless” FBI employees had contacted the White House to say they were happy about Comey’s dismissal. During her testimony to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team, Sanders admitted that this claim was a “slip of the tongue” and not based on any direct knowledge.

4. When questioned by Chuck Todd on January 22, 2017, about Sean Spicer’s “largest crowd ever” lie, Kelleyanne Conway said, “Don't be so overly dramatic about it, Chuck. You're saying it's a falsehood, and they're giving — our press secretary, Sean Spicer, gave alternative facts to that.” Todd replied, “Look, alternative facts are not facts. They're falsehoods.” Aaron Blake, “Kellyanne Conway says Donald Trump’s team has ‘alternative facts.’ Which pretty much says it all,” Washington Post (January 22, 2017).

[1]During the January 6 insurrection, rioters physically attacked and threatened reporters and vandalized their equipment. On February 11, 2019, a Trump supporter violently shoved and verbally assaulted a BBC cameraman in El Paso. On August 12, 2017, white nationalist groups supporting Trump harassed and attacked journalists. On May 24, 2017, Greg Gianforte, a Republican congressional candidate who later received Trump’s endorsement, body-slammed reporter Ben Jacobs from The Guardian after being asked a question about healthcare. Trump praised Gianforte's actions at a later rally, saying, “Any guy that can do a body-slam, he's my kind of guy.” See, e.g., Ryan Bort, “Trump Continues to Pave the Way for More Violence Against the Press,” Rolling Stone (October 19, 2018).