Big-Box Media Finds Ethics as Biden Horse Runs Into the Ground

After wholly abandoning the basic tenets of journalism in their “coverage” of President Joe Biden for a full five years dating back to his first becoming a candidate for the White House in 2019, the big-box media is now shocked to discover they have been used as a vehicle to deceive the American public. It’s another black eye for a profession that continues to see its reputation plummet to new lows that will only deepen as accountability again takes a back seat to pure partisan agenda.

“A second local radio host on [July 6] told ABC News that he was provided a list of questions in advance of his interview with President Joe Biden,” the network reported in an unusual display of on-the-spot reporting on this issue. “‘Yes, I was given some questions for Biden,’ Earl Ingram of Wisconsin’s CivicMedia told ABC News,” the Disney-owned media entity related.

A host of the other radio station involved lost her job due to the mini-scandal. “The interview featured pre-determined questions provided by the White House, which violates our practice of remaining an independent media outlet accountable to our listeners. As a result, [Andrea] Lawful-Sanders and WURD Radio have mutually agreed to part ways, effective immediately,” Sara Lomax, CEO of the Philadelphia station, announced.

Professional Journalists Don’t Do Things Like That?

What is going on here? ABC personally dispatched reporters to root out the truth on an egregious flouting of journalism standards. Yet this is the same ABC that is a high-profile member of a White House press pool that engages in this very practice regularly. In April 2023, Biden was discovered holding a “cheat sheet” containing a question a Los Angeles Times reporter was about to ask him at a press conference. The appearance of outright collusion was unavoidable.

Here’s how bulldog ABC News “Senior Coordinating Producer for White House and Capitol Hill coverage” Justin Fishel tackled what should have been a far more significant controversy than the actions of a couple of local radio stations who do not cover the Oval Office as their beat: “But later that day images emerged of what looked like a ‘cheat sheet’ [Biden] was spotted holding – notes apparently detailing in advance a question he would get from a newspaper reporter,” Fishel wrote as part of an “analysis” piece on the president’s advanced age. “In other words, it looked as if the White House somehow got a least one of the questions beforehand and wrote it down for him. It wasn't a good look for the White House or the press.”

Wasn’t a “good look”? Yes, and having your vault robbed overnight only to find the thieves were provided the key to gain entry isn’t “a good look” for bank employees.

The story does not end there, yet Fishel was more than willing to move on. “The reporter denied sharing any questions in advance and White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said there were differences between what was on Biden's card and what was asked,” Fishel continued. “She denied the White House gathers questions in advance."

“Perhaps it can be chalked up to thorough White House research. But some in the White House press corps see it as a protective staff carefully managing a president they rarely put in front of reporters in a formal setting.”

This is how easily one of the four major US network news departments brushed off a display millions of Americans rightfully consider an egregious violation of media ethics. Is it any wonder, then, that the Biden administration also believes it can tutor these same reporters on how to cover its political opposition as if they were its dutiful pupils?

Instructing the Media

“Biden’s re-election campaign has begun organizing a series of off-the-record trips for top political reporters and editors to the team’s headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware [to] meet senior officials, including the campaign manager, deputies, and other high-ranking advisors for background briefings on campaign strategy,” Semafor reported in January.

Well, maybe that doesn’t sound too bad. Wait, there’s more.

“They’re also using it as an opportunity to tell them what they’re getting wrong,” the news site added. “Two people with knowledge of the situation told Semafor that during meetings with reporters from outlets like The New York Times … and others, campaign officials have invoked a coverage spreadsheet laying out areas where the team believes their reporting has fallen short.”

These are two glaring examples of big-box media outlets crossing a bright red line. Since 2019, transparently misleading reporting on Biden’s health has become more routine. As recently as February, ABC News was spinning Biden’s increasingly alarming public persona as nothing more than a harmless habit of forgetfulness.

“ABC News spoke to several doctors in the field of medicine, neurology and psychiatry to understand how memory, aging and executive functioning relate, and they all agree that simply forgetting dates or timelines in the past does not imply anything specific about a person’s level of cognitive fitness, decision-making, judgment or executive functioning,” a February 13 article penned by network medical “media consultant” Dr. Jade Cobern of Johns Hopkins University explained.

This was the dominant media party line on Biden right up to his presidential debate fiasco on June 27. Then, suddenly, everything changed. A renewed concern for journalism standards has nothing to do with the pivot.