For the past 111 years, the White House has been held accountable by journalists selected by the nonpartisan White House Correspondents’ Association. The association’s job was to choose the reporters allowed in the press pool.
However, last Tuesday, President Trump’s staff informed the press that they would decide who would be chosen for the press pool.
The pool is normally made up of news outlets in four categories: Wire Services (AP, Reuters, Bloomberg), Broadcast Networks (ABC, MSNBC, Fox), Print Publications (The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal), and Radio (NPR). These outlets follow the president from the Oval Office to Air Force One, making sure there is news as soon as something happens with the president.
One of the most important photos of the 21st century is of President Bush being informed that a second plane had hit the World Trade Center. “The power and the weight of those words are obviously overwhelming and obviously very historic,” said Doug Mills later when asked about his photograph.
The only reason we have access to this monumental photo is because there was a photojournalist determined to capture the truth. When our government starts to interfere with the balance of bias in our news, it gets rid of the authenticity of journalism, the raw powerful stories told by people without other intentions.
Recently, with the Trump Administration’s takeover of the press pool, the AP was denied entry for refusing to use the name “Gulf of America.” Subsequently, the AP took legal action and sued the White House.
This new White House press pool already made news during Ukrainian President Zelensky’s visit to the White House. When the Ukrainian leader arrived, only pre-approved outlets were allowed to attend the press conference. Reporters from The New York Times and Reuters were reportedly barred from the briefing, while smaller, less-established conservative outlets were granted access.
This shift in press access has raised concerns about transparency and press freedom in the White House. Legal experts say the AP’s lawsuit could set an important precedent for media access to government affairs. Meanwhile, journalists and advocacy groups continue to push back, warning that government-controlled press access undermines democratic accountability.
As the legal battle unfolds, the future of the White House press pool remains uncertain. Will the courts intervene to restore independent selection, or will this new precedent reshape the way presidential coverage is handled for years to come?
