Should press access be controlled?
In the flurry of executive orders that Donald Trump passed on his first day as president, two stood out geographically. First, Trump ordered Mount Denali to be named Mount McKinley once more, and second, he declared the Gulf of Mexico would be renamed the “Gulf of America.”
This was a highly contentious item—According to Reuters, 70% of participants disliked it. However, several waterways hold different names for different entities, like the Persian Gulf, otherwise known as the Arabian Gulf.
Trump has long faced media criticism, often intense and provocative. Outlets like The Los Angeles Times and The Harvard Political Review have drawn parallels between him and Adolf Hitler. The most striking example came from MSNBC, which, on October 27, 2024, compared Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden to a Nazi rally held by the German American Bund at the same venue in 1939. This comparison ignited fierce debate, with critics arguing it exaggerated historical echoes.
The Associated Press (AP), a news agency, refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico by its new federal name, the Gulf of America. In response, on Tuesday, February 11, The AP had its access to the Oval Office removed, restricting them almost entirely from the president. While AP reporters still retain access to the White House grounds, they are unable to enter the Press Room or Trump’s office, where the majority of the news originates.
This would not be the first time that a president has blocked parts of the press from the Oval Office, as Richard Nixon blocked Stuart Lorry of The Los Angeles Times after he wrote a piece on how much Nixon’s vacation cost taxpayers. Going even further back, John Adams’ Sedition Act of 1798 blocked the press from writing anything that was “false, scandalous, and malicious writing.” This act led to the arrest and jailing of James Callender, a friend of Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin Bache, an editor of the Philadelphia Aurora.
In a more recent era, Barack Obama booted The Washington Times, The New York Post, and The Dallas Morning News off of Air Force One in 2008. This is also the second time President Trump has blocked someone from the White House, as he banned CNN’s Jim Acosta in 2018.
In addition to the AP, the President excluded CNN, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Buzzfeed, and Politico from an off-camera briefing.
Trump’s White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was unapologetic. “It’s a privilege to cover the White House,” she said. “And it is a fact that the body of water off the coast of Louisiana is called the Gulf of America, and I’m not sure why news outlets don’t want to call it that.”
The administration then justified its actions by stating that asking the president questions is not a right. In a statement, the administration declared, “As we have said from the beginning, asking the President of the United States questions in the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One is a privilege granted to journalists, not a legal right.”
The administration says they will rotate traditional outlets out of the press room, including some streaming services. Leavitt cast the change as a modernization of the press pool, saying the move would be more inclusive and restore “access back to the American people” who elected Trump.
The AP is filing a suit to get their ban removed and has made several comments to the media.
“It is essential in a democracy for the public to have access to news about their government from an independent, free press,” said top editors of the Associated Press, Bloomberg News, and Reuters. “We believe that any steps by the government to limit the number of wire services with access to the President threatens that principle.”
The administration’s claim that press access is a privilege, not a right, misses the mark.
Controlled press access raises serious concerns. By curating which outlets can report from the White House, the administration risks promoting narratives that align with its agenda, potentially obscuring the full story. This selective access could fuel false or incomplete reporting, which deepens public division. Many already distrust certain media outlets—such as the polarizing Fox News—further eroding confidence in what’s published.
The administration’s claim that press access is a privilege, not a right, misses the mark. A free press isn’t just a perk to be doled out at the government’s whim—it’s the backbone of democracy. Blocking outlets like the AP for refusing to toe the line on something as trivial as a waterway’s name sets a dangerous precedent.
History, from Adams to Nixon, shows that silencing dissent breeds mistrust, not unity. Trump’s team may argue this “modernizes” coverage, but cherry-picking who gets to ask questions doesn’t empower the American people—it shields the powerful from scrutiny. The AP’s lawsuit isn’t just about their access; it’s about ensuring the public isn’t left in the dark. Press control doesn’t strengthen governance; it weakens accountability, and that’s a cost too high to pay.
You must be logged in to post a comment.