Beware of politicians claiming to protect us from the press

This week, it became apparent that everyone believes in a free press, as long as it costs them nothing.

Politicians in both parties are now using their offices to insulate themselves from opposing coverage — all in the name of protecting the public or the press.

President Trump has ordered the banning of critical media companies from the White House. Meanwhile, Democrats are fighting to block a corporate media merger on equally raw political grounds.

At the White House this week, President Trump declared, “I am proud to announce that, effective immediately, I am banning Fake News CNN, MSNOW … and Politico.” He then added that he did not understand why the courts allow the media to print “fake news,” raising the possible addition of censorship to banishment.

On Capitol Hill and across the country, Democrats were pursuing their own political litmus test for media. Twelve blue states are in court seeking to block the acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery by Paramount Skydance. While framing their claims in dubious antitrust terms, many admit that they are trying to protect one of the very companies banned by Trump as a liberal platform: CNN.

Previously, Democrats shut down the government in part over a decision to withdraw government subsidies for another liberal news outlet , National Public Radio. Years ago, some Democrats even asked cable companies to consider dropping Fox News .

Both Trump and the Democrats are oblivious to the implications of their actions, blinded by the political costs of a free press and a free market.

There is little recognition, let alone remorse, among these politicians. For Trump, many in the public rallied to his side in condemnation of media bias during the last election. I have joined in the criticism of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico for their coverage. But this ban is a frontal assault on the free press itself, shattering long-standing principles maintained by past presidents.

Presidents have long condemned the media. George Washington referred to them as those “ infamous scribblers .” Thomas Jefferson complained that “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.” Yet they recognized that their oath to uphold the Constitution included a sacred duty to preserve and protect the free press.

For the Democrats, the opposition to the merger is equally transparent. Figures such as former Obama administration official Norm Eisen have opposed the Warner Bros.-Paramount merger as an attack on democracy itself. Their aim is to prevent the conservative David Ellison, chairman of Paramount Skydance, from gaining control of CNN as well as existing media assets such as CBS. Despite using antitrust law, he and others have made it plain that their aim is to preserve CNN and other outlets as liberal allies.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) declared that it is a power grab by the “oligarchs,” and that Ellison gaining control of CNN is “not acceptable. This merger must be opposed.”

Former Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer called on Democrats to stop the merger to prevent an effort to “make CNN more MAGA-friendly.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has warned that allowing the merger will “subvert CNN’s editorial independence.”

Notably, while MS NOW, CNN, and many of these individuals are condemning Trump’s announcement, they have eagerly joined the movement to block a lawful merger on political grounds. Others have pitched a deal where the merger can go through, but that they want CNN as “a strong consolation prize,” presumably to be sold to a liberal owner.

Again, there is little thought of the costs. There rarely is. When Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and others took credit for blocking the merger of Spirit Airlines with JetBlue, they declared it a victory for the Biden administration and the Democrats. Spirit Airlines then went bankrupt and all of its employees were fired.

In this case, CNN may be the Spirit Airlines of the media. It has been struggling with both revenues and ratings, despite occasional spikes. While the Democrats want to preserve the liberal platform that regularly features their interviews and narratives, CNN often operates dangerously to the baseline on the key advertising demographic needed to keep the lights on.

Warner Bros. has lost billions. The merger would be good for both companies and their employees. Under the guise of opposing a monopoly, Democrats are opposing a deal that has been cleared by the European Commission and once-skeptical experts.

I have worked for four networks as a legal analyst for 30 years, and I want CNN to flourish. We need strong media companies. That means that we need to support both the free press and the free market in maintaining journalistically and financially strong media companies. That often means setting aside our personal disagreements with coverage to oppose political manipulation of the media by either party.

I previously have written about the media and free speech in an “ age of rage. ” Presidents and politicians have periodically allowed their anger or interests to overwhelm their judgment. President John Adams declared, “The liberty of the press is essential to the security of the state.” Yet, his administration targeted reporters and writers under the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts.

Politicians are again using their power to manipulate the press by limiting their exposure to media criticism. They are seeking to control what the public reads and watches to protect us from “fake news” or “corporate messaging.”

For centuries, politicians have played on our anger or partisanship to target the media. To defend the free press and the free market is not to agree with these companies or their coverage. It is to defend our right to make our own decisions on what news to read and whom to believe.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “ Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution . “