I
watched the video of the now infamous press conference and I really
thought that CNN's Acosta was cross-examining Trump, interrupting him at
several times while trying to make various points and refutations (such
as over the meaning of "invasion"), etc.
I don't think
that that is the role of reporters at a press conference, and I'm sure
that not only hardcore Trump supporters found this rude. Some
may think that Trump is such a total shit (which he surely is) that such
behavior is justified, but I think that it is rude and, more importantly, simply
counter-productive: it plays right into Trump's hands. You simply can't out-Trump Trump.
Let
Congress attack the President hard and often. The print/broadcast
journalists should use their media positions to expose Trump's lies and
distortions and vileness. A press
conference is not the place to do this. It seems that if this kind of
behavior persists, Trump will simply cancel press conferences. (Though,
arguably, Trump came out of this one with a pretty good boost
nationally, though not among hard-core Trump-haters; I say this because
even I was uncomfortable with Acosta's behavior).
What
reporters might do at these conferences is get together beforehand
(privately) and agree to follow up on each other's questions -- which
questions should be, of course, cleverly constructed but short, and not
obviously prosecutorial. That would avoid ego-trips such as Acosta's
that look like cross-examination. Related questions from several
reporters would also show that concerns about Trump's lies is more
across-the-board.
(Of course the doctoring of
the news conference tape by the White House was outrageous; it was great
that they were caught by experts. In the future, I'm afraid, it will be
harder technically to catch this sort of thing as the techniques will
get better on the pixel-level...)
