|
It wasn’t the first complaint from a reader about political coverage. And it certainly won’t be the last.
But what distinguished Craig’s criticism was the fact it had nothing to do with the Free Press leaning too far left or right. Or that we were being unfair. Or that we had our facts wrong.
Instead, the trigger for his anger was our publication of something impossible for any newspaper to ignore.
Advertisement
“I was very disappointed to come across two large closeups of (Donald) Trump in my Saturday paper,” he wrote in a polite but pointed email.
“To my eye, and I’m sure many others, this is akin to coming across a large photo of a pile of excrement. Not something I want, ever. Of course these photos pop up everywhere but I’m not stuck with them in my face while reading for a length of time.”
From there, Craig moved to a forecast and a threat.
“I sense that in the coming months this is going to get worse. I don’t think you’ll change anything as a result of reading this but I am compelled to advise you that I will cancel my subscription when it gets to the point that I can’t take anymore.”
I was quick to get back to Craig, explaining there is no real remedy to our publishing images of the orange-tinged former president, given the trajectory that will have him on the ballot this fall in a bid to regain the White House. Whether the images are close-ups or from afar, Trump is Trump — and Trump is almost always in the news. The gag order handed down by a New York judge Tuesday won’t stop the photos of him from moving on the news wires or on our pages.
A supporter wears a Trump mask ahead of a campaign rally with the Republican presidential candidate earlier this month. A reader complains he’s seen too much of his face — but it’s impossible for media to ignore. (Steve Helber / The Associated Press files)
There was a time when Trump was good news for newspapers, even as he sowed distrust in the media. The so-called Trump bump saw newspaper readership and subscriber revenue spike in the United States as he began his presidency in 2016.
I have no idea if the passage of time, the insurrection, the indictments, the incitements of hate, etc., have turned that bump into a headwind for newspapers as subscribers like Craig reach the end of their rope. But I do know that news avoidance is on the rise.
Whether it’s because of distrust in the media or a sense of being overwhelmed in a way that impacts mental health, actively avoiding news is part of a growing trend.
As I write tonight’s newsletter, I’m 35,000 feet above several U.S. states that Trump won in 2020. Eventually, the desert awash in shades of orange comes into view during my spring break flight. And my flight passes over quite a few news deserts: areas where there is little or no local news coverage. And those are all areas ripe for Trump.
“An extensive review of subscription data and election results shows that Trump outperformed the previous Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, in counties with the lowest numbers of news subscribers, but didn’t do nearly as well in areas with heavier circulation,” Politico wrote early in Trump’s first term.
I get that Craig is tired of seeing Trump and reading all about him. But if he and others want to stop seeing Trump, the answer likely doesn’t involve news avoidance.
Rather, the more American voters see and read about Trump in newspapers before election day, the more likely it is they will see a picture of a defeated Trump on their front page the morning after the presidential vote is counted.
|
