New York City-based news agency Associated Press (AP) faces a wave of criticism following its coverage of former President Donald Trump’s recent visit to Capitol Hill.
On Thursday, June 13, the AP reported that Trump met with Republican lawmakers from both the House and Senate at GOP campaign headquarters, located just across the street from the Capitol. The visit itself wasn’t the focal point of the outrage; it was the way AP reported it that sparked significant backlash.
The AP described Trump’s visit as a “triumphant return to Capitol Hill,” stating, “Donald Trump made a triumphant return to Capitol Hill on Thursday, his first visit with lawmakers since the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks, embraced by energized House and Senate Republicans who find themselves reinvigorated by his bid to retake the White House.”
Critics quickly took to social media platforms to condemn the AP, accusing it of blatant bias and a departure from journalistic standards.
One user on X, formerly known as Twitter, expressed their dismay, writing, “We’re in serious trouble when the Associated Press prints this type of blatant propaganda for a candidate. ‘Triumphant return?’ Disgusting.”
Another user voiced similar sentiments, stating, “The Associated Press was once the epitome of journalism, but this headline is indistinguishable from a press release issued by a convicted felon. How appalling.”
The reaction was not limited to casual social media users. Mark Jacob, a former editor at the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times, tweeted his shock, “Did an Associated Press editor think at all about the implications of using the word ‘triumphant’ to describe Trump’s return to the scene of the crime? This is shameful.”
The criticism extended beyond word choice to concerns about the normalization of Trump’s actions and political resurgence. “When we’ve lost the Associated Press, we’ve officially lost our way. God help us,” one user lamented, reflecting a broader sense of despair.
“I thought the AP was the most impartial news outlet. JFC we’re so doomed,” another user commented, highlighting the disappointment felt by those who had previously held the AP in high regard.
Comments accusing the AP of crossing the line into propaganda were particularly harsh. “I never thought I’d have to block the Associated Press, but here we are. I’m not blocking a legitimate news organization. I’m blocking a propaganda mouthpiece for a treasonous, convicted felon,” wrote one disillusioned user.
The backlash also resonated within the journalistic community. Seasoned journalists and editors expressed their disappointment, with one American lamenting, “What happened to @AP? Triumphant? Seriously? Good grief, I’m going to have to block The Associated Press. So disappointing! Has MSM lost their minds or courage? Praising a felon who tried to destroy the country isn’t what I expect from reputable news outlets.”
Another critic commented, “The Associated Press has just squandered any credibility for reporting the truth by putting out this kind of ridiculous statement. The AP may as well give up because nobody is ever going to believe them.”
The AP has yet to respond formally to the criticism. This incident underscores the precarious position that even established news organizations find themselves in today. Balancing reporting the news and maintaining perceived impartiality has never been more delicate, as this controversy demonstrates, showing how a single word can ignite a firestorm of controversy.
