The lap dogs of democracy who didn’t bark at Trump
Washington Post
The lap dogs of democracy who didn’t bark at Trump
By Dana Milbank Opinion writer
Opinions October 24 at 5:40 PM
Donald Trump’s closing argument has been to blame his fall on the dishonest, corrupt, horrible, poisonous and biased media.
Trump is correct that there has been something wrong with the coverage. But the problem is the media didn’t show bias against Trump earlier and more often. I’m not talking about partisan bias, but a healthy and necessary journalistic bias against authoritarianism.
Press treatment of Trump has, gradually and belatedly, become much tougher. But we in the media made Trump possible in the first place and enjoyed the entertainment (and ratings) he provided for far too long. When the election ends — if it ends — there needs to be some newsroom soul-searching.
Journalists for generations styled themselves “watchdogs of democracy,” growling at falsehoods and barking at abuses in the system. David Fahrenthold, Glenn Kessler and many of my Washington Post colleagues have upheld this proud tradition throughout the 2016 campaign.
But in general, watchdogs until recently were outnumbered in this election by those who cover politics as horse race, praising the maneuvers of whichever candidate is ahead in the polls. This avowedly neutral approach — process journalism — is apolitical. But it’s also amoral — a he-said-she-said approach that in this case confused tactics for truth and what works for what’s right.
More
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-lap-dogs-of-democracy-who-didnt-bark-at-trump/2016/10/24/26ba3418-9a28-11e6-9980-50913d68eacb_story.html?utm_term=.f6cfab29179c
= new reply since forum marked as read
thanks! 
