US reporters praise German journalists for questioning Trump: In her report, Dunz later wrote, "It is no longer a custom in the White House that hard, uncomfortable questions receive factual answers."

US reporters praise German journalists for questioning Trump: In her report, Dunz later wrote, "It is no longer a custom in the White House that hard, uncomfortable questions receive factual answers."
US reporters praise German journalists for questioning Trump: In her report, Dunz later wrote, "I...

"US reporters praise German journalists for doing their job for them."

Reuters covered this in a memo to their staff about the Trump administration.

Give up on hand-outs and worry less about official access. They were never all that valuable anyway. Our coverage of Iran has been outstanding, and we have virtually no official access. What we have are sources.

The fact they're comparing their ability to cover the US with their ability to cover Iran says a lot about the current state of the US government.

If US reporters are shocked someone asks Trump pointed questions, US reporters need to grow some fucking balls already.

It's called "the fourth estate", not "Trump's PR Agency" for fucks sake. Put more resources into investigative journalism and a lot less on fluff. Do your damned civic duty and find out what they're trying to hide.

"Journalism is printing what someone else doesn't want printed. Everything else is public relations." -- George Orwell

Edit: It's not like the President can get on the news unless the news put him on. They can just refuse to air any of his press conferences unless he starts talking. It's not like the power only flows one way, which the press seems to have completely forgotten.

Having had several agencies shut out of that private meeting with Spicer recently, I wouldn't put it past some of them being afraid of being cut off. As much as honesty and integrity matters to news agencies, so does access to 'content'....and losing this access could be very bad.

Not excusing it, just trying to understand it.

America: #41 in press freedom (its going to drop in 2017)

Germany: #16 in press freedom

As a non-American, I never understood why people get such a hard-on for America. By any objective measure, America can't possibly be "the best" as many claim it is. I'm not claiming my country is either, but that's my point, my country is by most objective standards better than the US and you won't see many of us claiming we're "the best".

You put out some good media, you have a great army (though I don't get why that is brag worthy), and that's about it. Press freedom? Mediocre at best. Education? Abysmal. Political system? Barely more than a punchline to a bad joke nowadays.

Don't get me wrong I get liking and loving your country, but Americans have seem to have such a hard-on for their own country, claiming they're the best, that you're number one, it's incredibly cringe worthy. It's almost a North Korea style indoctrination you guys seem to be getting in the style of "Nono we don't suck, they do, but they lie".

The google search "obama forced to admit" gains only 3,600 hits

Without going into whether you're right or wrong about the underlying question, this is an incredibly poor way of checking or proving your point.

Hear, hear.

That clip of the dinner where Bush pretends to search for WMDs and the reporters erupt in gales of laughter is chilling. Hundreds of thousands of people died for nothing and a whole country was destabilized for a generation and yet to the media it's just a big joke.

It should have been thus long ago. Assuming that your democracy or political system is resilient enough not to need constant scrutiny is exactly the complacency that proves fatal.

The style of making one point and swiftly changing direction reminded some foreign policy experts of the way Mr. Trump acted on the campaign trail, when his position on certain issues could veer wildly from one day to the next.

It's one of the reasons I can't understand why he wants to visit the UK. Not only does most of the public think he's a cunt, there is also the UK press who are not known for holding back and being nice. And since the establishment all think he's a tit too, he's going to go from one uncomfortable situation to another.

He's going to HATE it.

It's always been this way in the States. An Irish reporter was criticised heavily by the White House for her interview of Bush in 2004. Apparently the normal approach to interviewing politicians was too strong for an American president.

It's really, really hard to explain. American Exceptionalism has been around almost our entire history - and we have been so geographically separate from all the conflicts of the world that there has never been anything to challenge it. Even the wars we lose don't really have an effect on us - no territory lost, only lives and money. It's made this bubble in which we all echo our own thoughts on how great, rich, free, and benevolent we are. Ugh, there's a lot too it, but I just woke up, and it's a weird concept to explain.

No, they are saying the press conferences are basically useless as no questions of substance get answered in them. They have access to video and can use their own sources like they do in other nations without official access.

Basically playing with kid gloves In hopes of not getting kicked out of the room is not the way they want to play any longer. Which is arguably the best answer.

And honestly, the White House Correspondents Dinner is kind of bullshit.

These people should not be friends with each other.

Love the spirit of your comment, but that's a commonly misattributed Orwell quote.

He's angry he can't deny the Holocaust in Germany. Yeah, that's totally a problem for free speech.

I see what you are saying, but to suggest America is not objectively the best at imprisoning our citizens is just cruel.

they were very mean and made Donnie feel bad by quoting him

It may not be the custom for this White House, but "customs" are not destroyed in a few months.

I just hope no one throws a shoe at Trump. His hair might fall off and then we will have WWIII.

Can you get me links to any of these fake news and something to proove that they were fake?

Limited space was never a problem for any other white house and did not lead to press being cut-off. In the end it was a political decision to avoid press that was asking hard questions and choose those that would send soft-balls.

What answer?Trump just rambles about unrelated topics when he gets asked "hard" questions. That nonsense may fly in the campaign trail or at his ego boost rallies, but this is the big leauges baby. This ain't no reality show. He better buck up.

The Trump fans that I know are pretty committed. This isn't the close to being the kind of thing that would put them off. And I'm not sure what would.

I'm disappointed that fox news journalist who got trump to admit he got the wire tapping story from right wing conspiracies didn't just walk out of the room or call the president a moron. Yeah you'd lose access, but come the fuck on-- The press conferences are a joke. In each one Spicer gets beaten to a pulp and then comes back the next day grinning for more.

When has it ever been a custom in the White House?

Wasn't it because Spicer was simply trying to evade answering? When the teacher serves you bullshit, the student is right to call him out.

You do realize some people not being allowed to participate in a conversation because they ask questions with answers you dislike is the action of a cowardly baby.

but Americans have seem to have such a hard-on for their own country, claiming they're the best, that you're number one, it's incredibly cringe worthy.

61% of Americans have never left America. 8% of the British have never left the UK. 15% of Canadians have never left Canada.

Most people who love America have literally never been anywhere else and are absolutely terrified to, in many cases. Our sensationalist media loves to paint people overseas as hating us (and it was fairly easy, for most of my life... people were wary of Clinton, then there was Bush... Obama was a huge benefit to our international image/stereotype, but now we have Trump...).

/u/AJEstes is absolutely spot on that it's mostly just American Exceptionalism; I'm just trying to explain how the idea continues to float around in the US (it's taught in schools, and because Americans never leave the US it's never refuted).

banned from the whitehouse

How the fuck is that even allowed? Press conferences should be held in a manner where press can attend, regardless of the Presidents opinion about them. The press is supposed to be independent and such a loop hole just cries for abuse.

Its easier to say "fake news" or "MSM bias" than admit you got conned i guess

If Us reporters ask those question they would be banned from the whitehouse, so they have to play 'nice'. German reporters don't have that problem.

It amazes me that you people actually believe this. Alt-reality is a silly place.

Huh? Consistency and rational stances benefit everyone. You don't need to be open about your strategy, but you definitely need to be clear and consistent in how you bring about that strategy.

Just look at Obama and his "red line" on Syria. Waffling does nothing to advance your foreign policy goals, nor does spasmed tweets that get reversed the next day.

Bizarre reversals and chaos is not how to form a coherent foreign policy.

Firm policy initiatives and follow through is integral to diplomacy

Oh please, Obama was asked real questions as well. He was pushed on drone strikes, he was pushed on climate change. He was pushed on Benghazi (when it first happened, Fox just kept the obsession going), what to do in Iraq, etc, etc.

The difference is that Obama actually answered those questions, and the media didn't have to need to play any sort of "games" with him in order to get some sort of straight answer.

If Us reporters ask those question they would be banned from the whitehouse, so they have to play 'nice'.

That's a spineless attitude. What good are they doing as stenographers of lies?

At some point you need to draw a line in the sand - "I will not participate in this farce."

And I fail to see what advantages they are getting by compromising the truth.

Everyone gets a live feed of the press conference. There's no advantage to actually being at the conference if you aren't allowed to ask any interesting questions.

Stephen Colbert's amazing roast of Bush

That was also the year of which bombed terribly in the room but went viral over the next day or so.

I have been downvoted to hell for saying this exact thing. Sports journalist have to be very careful about their relationships with players so they can get the best answers. Political journalists are the same way. Hell... Back in the day it was prostitution that probably had the best news, until they donned hats and a notepad.

Well we found Trump's weakness,asking questions.Enough of those and his deflections are going to be very obvious,even to his thick skulled supporters.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this - are you saying that investigative journalists should stay light on their feet and be diplomatic about what and how they report? Because I'm sceptical that looking for the "best" answers (for what? your business? your profit margin? pleasing your readership?) is the behaviour we should be emulating here.

There was a big crackdown on journalists in the Bush era.

Dan Rather was arguably setup to fall by his network; it was pretty bad how the documents were not authenticated.

False equivalency.

I did not see that one, but my question for you in return. Did Spicer answer or acknowledge Karl the first time or did he evade answering in some way?

If Spicer was evading, a reporters job is to get an answer as much as it is to report truths and not spin facts based on a conservative or liberal bias.

Whatever. The press corps had a field day picking apart some dumb moves Obama made. He made poor choices in Afghanistan, but hey no one cares about Afghanistan because nearly none of the population has been there.

Erm no, the US media still doesnt care about asking tough questions. ... Thats the entire point of the article.

They don't give a fuck about you!

These people are not your friends.

You have to look into his heart, not into what he says.

There is none. They dared to take Trumps words at face value instead of reading between the lines. I live in England, and I still hear people saying "yeah he said that, but what he meant was..."

I can't imagine how shitty America is with this nonsense. "Yeah he said that. But he didn't mean that."

Yeah, Redditors do this all the time, and their favorite is equating Fox News and MSNBC, which is also nonsense.

This propaganda serves an important goal, though: rather than seeing Fox News as an extremist outlier, this makes people visualize a sort of "scale" with MSNBC on the left and Fox News on the right, and in the middle there is "balance".

This is a deceitful description deliberately crafted with the Overton Window in mind.

Manifest Destiny. We had this huge, sprawling continent full of natural resources that God had ordained for us. The only thing in the way was some red-skinned, inhuman savages we could either 'civilize' or just slaughter... we tended to go for the latter. It's the entire reason America was not a part of Imperialism; we already had more territory than we knew what to do with. Even after 200 years we still have a shockingly low population density. We fought small wars throughout much of our history, with the Civil War (a domestic issue) being the only one with true stakes.

America wasn't playing the Empire Building game, but it thought it was pretty damn special. 'God gave this land to me'

Hostile reporter being defined as one who asks newsworthy questions.

"It's called the American dream... but you have to be asleep to believe it..." - that was good.

Do you think honesty and integrity matters to Fox News or Breitbart?

I know, I can't wait. Hopefully the British hosts will be led by Jeremy Paxman.

Misquoting is rampant on the web. Usually it's better to just post the statement and leave out the alleged source. However, if you're willing to do the research and verify the source of your favourite quote, by all means do so and post the source too.

-Abraham Lincoln

Oh I remember what it was like before Trump: clear, concise and factual answers to difficult questions, none of this new "question dodging" fad that Trump invented.

It's weird, because I don't remember Obama ever being ruthlessly pursued about anything expect by Fox, and always (at least from what I saw) shutting them down. Correct me if I'm wrong.

A president with an anti-American, anti-Free Press agenda is a new phenomenon that we're all adjusting to.

Look up "American exceptionalism". It is a myth many americans believe in, to the point where they will verbally attack you if explain it is just a myth. I remember when internet first became commonplace, many americans automatically assumed all foreigners online where of the very rich class, because only the very rich foreigners would be able to afford electricity, let alone a computer. Hell back in the 80's it was still common to see americans be absolutely flabbergasted that other countries had TV.

Well, our constitution has two articles in it that are mainly touched by what you are arguing about:

First article - Human dignity

(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.

(2) The German people therefore acknowledge inviolable and inalienable human rights as the basis of every community, of peace and of justice in the world.

Fifth article - Freedom of expression, arts and sciences

(1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures, and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.

(2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honour.

(3) Arts and sciences, research and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.

We are balancing freedom of speech against basic human dignity. So if you are expressing an opinion, that is alright. No one will persecute you for that. If you express your opinion using insults or to disturb, i'll call it, "public peace", then yes, you should be held accountable for these insults/...

I've never seen a problem in this. The Böhmermann case is special. The law protecting foreign heads of state will be removed. But his "poem" is still an insult and can, rightfully, be persecuted in civil court. We just have to seem to have slightly different standards. I never felt like my ability to express my opinion was infringed upon.

Interesting, so it was actually William Randolph Hearst.

If you can make your people believe that your country is best - why then would they question or focus on improvements? You should be happy and content because you are living in the greatest country there is!

Edit: missed out word 'believe'

Which other president shit his pants and HAD to say some unnecessary and unfounded bullshit on Twitter when something doesn't go his way? Oh riiight

The country where you need to be rich to receive any education worthwhile? Where otherwise you land in lifelong debt? The country where literacy rates lie between 65 to 85% depending on the sources, and even going by a generous 85% this is still lower than the world average?

Anti free speech laws? Wha-?

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 72%. (I'm a bot)

US President Donald Trump claimed that German news agency reporter Kristina Dunz was interested in "Fake news" when she asked him about isolationist policies.

Those were two of the tough questions Trump faced during a press conference Friday with Merkel that led US journalists who cover the White House to praise the tenacity of their German colleagues.

CNN White House reporter Jeremy Diamond applauded German reporters for sticking to a line of questioning on phone taps.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top keywords: question#1 report#2 Trump#3 German#4 President#5

It's more that it's a very vocal sub-set of Americans who are like that and it's more common in rural regions and conservative states. The reason that it's an easy trap for some to fall into is because we are a relatively large and isolated country. Only a small percentage of Americans even have a passport and have left the country, if you didn't count trips to Canada or resorts in the Caribbean or Mexico it probably drops a lot more. It's easy to say we're the best when you have nothing in your experience to compare it to.

Another thing to remember related to the size of this country is how varied the states/regions are. If you treat the states as separate countries you would see a very different picture. An article in Forbes did just that:

if Massachusetts were allowed to report subject scores independently -- much the way that, say, Shanghai is allowed to do so -- the Bay State would rank 9th in the world in Math Proficiency, tied with Japan, and on the heels of 8th-ranked Switzerland. In reading, Massachusetts would rank fourth in the world, tied with Hong Kong, and not far behind third-ranked Finland. ... Massachusetts ranks second only to top-ranked Singapore in global measures of science competency. ... Moreover, in reading, Vermont would be tied for fifth with Singapore, ahead of such perennial PISA stalwarts as New Zealand, Japan, Canada, Australia and Belgium. ... At 14% proficiency in math, Mississippi is on par with Bulgaria, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay. At 8% math proficiency, DC is on par with Kazakhstan, Mexico and Thailand.


Isn't this like saying no one is a good person because everyone has done something wrong at some point?

Edit: since the person I'm replying too didn't feel like he could let his comment stand criticism, the deleted comment said that he knew there was no reputable news agency because he could name a scandal occurring with every single one of them.

And what he reported was true.

Look at some of the comments on my comment here already, after only 25 minutes. Some very triggered Americans coming in with pretty bad arguments.

You can't be asked a trick question, you can only give tricked answers.

The president is a snowflake, get over it.

So its okay for people to go to jail for get fined for ad hominem?

Of course. Literally every country on earth (including the US) does this. It's called libel and slander laws.

We were a part of Imperialism actually. We took possession of Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the Phillipenes.

he's a god; he is moses. these are people that for real believe the earth is 6,000 years old, are poor as fuck with no future in sight, have never really been exposed to anything but church and hate radio, and are all white

It's been that way for much longer then she realizes.

Especially with the rhetoric about "If you make $x a year, you're better off than y% of the world, so you shouldn't be complaining".

While the statistic may be true, the statement as a whole is fallacious. It's like saying "you have a broken hand, but the average number of hands per person is less than 2, so you should just be happy you're above average".

It's manipulative, at best, to tell someone to stop complaining because they aren't in dire straits.

64% don't have passports, which is some of the most accurate data I could find. Here's a writeup I found as to a few reasons I'd have mentioned, to save myself the typing.

There's also This data from Pew about people moving and living in places (37% live in the same town they were born/raised in, and have never lived anywhere else, and including that 57% live in the same state as they grew up in).

The Atlantic did a report on this affecting the presidential race in terms of demographics/alignment.

The American people are too poor to afford proper vacations, don't get enough time off, are are taught to be afraid of every "inferior" nation in a thousand different ways (American Exceptionalism).

It's really no wonder...

He didn't answer them, that I've seen, so not much of a victory.

If USA reporters ask hard questions they get their credentials pulled. Visitors should go ahead and ask decent questions, but it'll only be a matter of time before they cull the press and get down to 'friendly' or 'nice questions' like they want.


Just curious. How does a 2nd semester junior equate to a degree?

So, you're asserting that I support Hillary. That would be fallacious. I've got no skin in US politics other than as an observer.

If Trump supporters weren't as myopic in their fervent belief that somehow he's a messiah, they might be able to explain how they accept his constant about-faces, outright lies, deceit, arrogance, lack of depth on every issue. What do you find so compelling that you overlook all of this. As someone who states that he's served in some capacity for his country, how do you reconcile his belittling of John McCain? From someone who gamed the draft to evade his service.

Is Mexico paying for the wall? Or will US consumers?

Did Obama "tapp" his phones, or has he backed away from that. Will trumpcare add massive debt, kick many US citizens off, or is the CBO making it up? His every day outbursts are comedy to everyone but his toothless supporters, yet they wallow in them like hogs in mud.

Or people are now more worried that he'll start wars because of a hissy fit than about assault allegations?

It hasn't been customary to ask hard questions for at least two Presidents before. Just read this thread and you'll see examples of Bush's WH criticizing reporters for the same thing.

I'm sure if you searched for Obama, you'll see a distinct lack of hard hitting questions from anyone, including foreign media.

The fact here is that people don't like Trump, so they're going to now pick apart the culture that has existed for over a decade at least in order to embarrass him. Europeans especially don't like him, and so media that's being sold to them is going to try to get him to look foolish.

Not true. America saw itself as a small part of the world until the beginning of the 20th century.

Before that, the world was ruled by the British Empire or the French Colonial Empire and the US was mostly busy at its own place fighting the civil war and attracting new states to the union.

A lot of the UK press are either ideologically not that far off Trump's wavelength or won't want to embarrass too much the Government they support (whatever they may otherwise claim - Daily Mail, Telegraph, Express) and/or controlled by Murdoch, a la Trump's buddies at Fox (The Sun, The Times). There's perhaps only The Guardian of the serious mainstream papers will be willing to have a proper go, maybe The Mirror from the tabloids as well.

As far as TV news goes - Sky is at least partly Murdoch controlled, and the BBC has taken a beating in recent years for not being "neutral" enough so probably won't go far out on a limb. Channel 4 or ITV possibly may have a go.

The Economist or the FT I'd certainly have some faith in, albeit any pressure they're likely to exert will be in their core business areas and less about the wider social issues under Trump.

Private Eye is the best investigative publication going but I doubt they'll get any direct access. However, often things they dig up will get picked up by the wider media so it'll be interesting to see if they find anything in advance. Trump's battle with the locals over one of his Scottish golf courses has been a recurring feature for many years, as unexciting as that may sound.

"It was like watching an angry child who can't listen to his teacher."

Spicer/the administration isn't our teacher. We have no social or political obligation to be nice when being lied to.

Trump isn't our boss. He doesn't sign our paychecks; we sign his.

It's disappointing that it's the way it is. I wonder if 'praising' Germans reporters for doing this makes US reporters guilty by association and subsequently banned.

Tell us again how smart you are.

When calling someone an idiot, it literally weakens your point if your spelling is terrible. Just saying.

Which ones have you limited yourself to?

Because Teen Vogue is killing it lately.

That's... Slightly terrifying.

As a British observer of US news it does seem to me that American journalists are often very timid in their reporting of the President. They will say "mis-spoke" when they ought to say "lied".

I'm not sure why this is but one factor might be that the President is both the chief executive and the head of state. To be seen to be implicitly criticising them can be interpreted as somehow being disloyal to the country.

Most other countries have separate positions of prime minister and president, or monarch so these roles are not conflated.

What?! What does this even mean?

A newsreporter's role is not print press releases. If they aren't going to be allowed to ask any difficult questions, I don't see what they lose by just seeing the feed of the press conferences.

This was true even before Trump took office.

One should never expect truthful answers to hard questions. Their job is to push an agenda

Their job is to serve the people.

And you're phrasing your points like you were the Queen of England You're not.

I've got some keen memories of a female RT reporter asking John Kirby (US State Dept) some uncomfortable questions, probably about Syria, and watching Kirby squirm and prevaricate and evade and spin. And lose his temper, LOL. This was during the Obama 'era'...

By "playing nice" with a Trump White House, the obligating press condones censorship. Fuck censorship.

I think you are confusing censorship and libel laws. Censorship is a state preventing dissemination of certain information. Libel is people and conpanies suing each orther because they don't like what the orther side said, but that is typically after piblication about damages or a retraction.

I think if you look up lawsuits in the US, there are plenty of cases where people have been forced to pay damages for libelous statements. or had to remove or black-out parts of books they wanted to publish. Basically the two main things where your free speech is limited in Germany is a) denying the holocaust and using Nazi symbols for political purposes and b) inciting violence against minorities.

The Böhmermann case involved an archaic law against insulting foreign heads of state, and will actually be removed from the books - as it should - due to it infringing on free speech.

The only two sources I ever see who are complaining against alleged "censorship" in Germany are a) US scientologists trying to claim religious oppression in Germany and b) US right wing nuts who already have a problem with German's gun regulation, so they also shout "oppressive state".

What degree does an embedded systems engineer entail, or is it one of those US diploma or certificate "engineers". I don't believe you have all your teeth.

I always have a sick curiosity to read all the hidden downvoted comments. On this one I'd recommend against it.

Having top universities doesn't mean your education system is good. What percentage of students attend those universities? Not a significant percentage. This is like saying you have the best healthcare in the world because the best hospital in the world is in your country. What about all the other hospitals?

He's most certainly not the first to dodge a question.

American univiersities are top. They drag so many foreign brain power to their country. But the lower education, the education of the average american citizen, is really abysmal.

that hasn't been a custom in the white house for a long time

Another thing is, your pledge of allegiance in school freaks me out and while not reminiscent of North Korea, it does give me a distinct Nazi Germany vibe. Not saying America = Nazis, but hot damn it's creepy having small children pledge allegiance to your country first thing each morning.

How does one say "savage" in German?

What are you talking about then?

"It is no longer a custom in the White House that hard, uncomfortable questions receive factual answers."

Umm...when has this ever been the case?

I was framing this in term's of OP's expectations that our media would rip him to shreds. I'm more concerned whether they're willing to be critical and inquisitive. Our print media is broadly very partisan; The Guardian being very lefty will do so, the rest less so. Even the right leaning papers haven't been particularly positive about Trump, but I doubt they'd be willing to do the hard digging.

On the other hand, note also that I state that I trust the FT and Economist who do good quality journalism IMO, in depth critical analysis and are actually cautiously positive about some of Trump's fiscal policy agenda whilst being reserved elsewhere.

From 2001 to 2004 it was that exactly. 'Murica Fuck Yeah!!!

then we invaded Iraq.... Gas shot up to $4 a gallon, and thats when we realized our president was a texas oil barron. And that we were retarded.

"If Obama didn't do the Affordable Healthcare Act, then I wouldn't have to be here taking your money and raping your dead wife to send a message."

Not doubting your claim, but 61% of Americans never leaving the country is a lower number than I would have guessed. Do you know if that stat includes immigrants?