WASHINGTON: America’s mainstream press, including the New York Times and CNN, are getting a drubbing from sections of the media fraternity for “sanewashing” Donald Trump‘s unhinged election speeches even as the former president is spiraling into ever-crazier remarks replete with trash-talking and fear-mongering.
“Sanewashing,” a term coined recently by the independent journalist Aaron Rupar, refers to the msm practice of distilling the nonsensical word stew Trump is ladling out in campaign speeches into logical, coherent remarks, in the process normalising an incomprehensible presentation that has become a Trump trademark on the campaign trail.
The term was born after Trump dished out absolute drivel in response to a question at an economic policy event by Reshma Saujani, the Indian-American founder of the group MomsFirst, on how he would resolve the rising cost of childcare in America. The media, including the Wall Street Journal, took it upon itself to conjecture that Trump meant to convey that revenue from tariffs he would impose on foreign nations would be so great it would somehow offset domestic childcare costs.
In more egregious examples, the media has taken to simply sanitising or censoring some of Trump crazier remarks because they are so patently false to the point of being absurd. In recent engagements, Trump has repeated his bizarre and spurious claim that children are being subjected to sex change operations when they go to school and return home with a different gender.
He has also blathered on and on about later-term abortions, including claiming babies are aborted after they are born (which would amount to infanticide, a word may be too complicated for him) and crimes perpetrated by illegal immigrants, even though the allegations are not borne out by data.
Some media mavens are calling out such “sanewashing” of Trump statements, saying it a form of misinformation that poses a threat to democracy. “By continually reframing Trump’s incoherent and often dangerous rhetoric as conventional political discourse, major news outlets are failing in their duty to inform the public and are instead providing cover for increasingly erratic behavior from a former—and potentially future—president,” the media critic Parker Molloy said.
“The consequences of this journalistic malpractice extend far beyond misleading headlines. By laundering Trump’s words in this fashion, the media is actively participating in the erosion of our shared reality,” Molloy wrote.
The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg explained how this process works in the msm newsroom: Trump sounds nuts, but he can’t be nuts, because he’s the presumptive nominee for president of a major party, and no major party would nominate someone who is nuts. Therefore, it is our responsibility to sand down his rhetoric, to identify any kernel of meaning, to make light of his bizarro statements, to rationalize.
Some media commentators also trashed NYT for trying to elevate Trump’s twaddle into great oratory that he claims, including invoking, in one oped, literary giants like James Joyce and William Faulkner.
“This analysis goes beyond mere sanitization; it ventures into the realm of the absurd. By framing Trump’s incoherent ramblings as some form of avant-garde oratory, the Times isn’t just failing to accurately report—it’s actively warping reality to its readers,” Molloy said, warning that the consequences of this exercise extends beyond misleading headlines or sanitized quotes — “it’s creating a dangerous disconnect between reality and reported news, fostering an environment where extreme rhetoric becomes normalized and conspiracy theories gain unwarranted legitimacy.”
Many news outlets that ran fact checks on Trump’s statements have now given up on the practice, simply because there are so many and they come so fast and furious. At a MAGA rally in Wisconsin on Saturday, Trump revved up his MAGA flock by claiming that 100 million illegal immigrants would swarm into the US if Kamala Harris is elected, taking away everything from Americans, including their homes. Getting them out will be a “bloody story” he warned.
“Sanewashing,” a term coined recently by the independent journalist Aaron Rupar, refers to the msm practice of distilling the nonsensical word stew Trump is ladling out in campaign speeches into logical, coherent remarks, in the process normalising an incomprehensible presentation that has become a Trump trademark on the campaign trail.
The term was born after Trump dished out absolute drivel in response to a question at an economic policy event by Reshma Saujani, the Indian-American founder of the group MomsFirst, on how he would resolve the rising cost of childcare in America. The media, including the Wall Street Journal, took it upon itself to conjecture that Trump meant to convey that revenue from tariffs he would impose on foreign nations would be so great it would somehow offset domestic childcare costs.
In more egregious examples, the media has taken to simply sanitising or censoring some of Trump crazier remarks because they are so patently false to the point of being absurd. In recent engagements, Trump has repeated his bizarre and spurious claim that children are being subjected to sex change operations when they go to school and return home with a different gender.
He has also blathered on and on about later-term abortions, including claiming babies are aborted after they are born (which would amount to infanticide, a word may be too complicated for him) and crimes perpetrated by illegal immigrants, even though the allegations are not borne out by data.
Some media mavens are calling out such “sanewashing” of Trump statements, saying it a form of misinformation that poses a threat to democracy. “By continually reframing Trump’s incoherent and often dangerous rhetoric as conventional political discourse, major news outlets are failing in their duty to inform the public and are instead providing cover for increasingly erratic behavior from a former—and potentially future—president,” the media critic Parker Molloy said.
“The consequences of this journalistic malpractice extend far beyond misleading headlines. By laundering Trump’s words in this fashion, the media is actively participating in the erosion of our shared reality,” Molloy wrote.
The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg explained how this process works in the msm newsroom: Trump sounds nuts, but he can’t be nuts, because he’s the presumptive nominee for president of a major party, and no major party would nominate someone who is nuts. Therefore, it is our responsibility to sand down his rhetoric, to identify any kernel of meaning, to make light of his bizarro statements, to rationalize.
Some media commentators also trashed NYT for trying to elevate Trump’s twaddle into great oratory that he claims, including invoking, in one oped, literary giants like James Joyce and William Faulkner.
“This analysis goes beyond mere sanitization; it ventures into the realm of the absurd. By framing Trump’s incoherent ramblings as some form of avant-garde oratory, the Times isn’t just failing to accurately report—it’s actively warping reality to its readers,” Molloy said, warning that the consequences of this exercise extends beyond misleading headlines or sanitized quotes — “it’s creating a dangerous disconnect between reality and reported news, fostering an environment where extreme rhetoric becomes normalized and conspiracy theories gain unwarranted legitimacy.”
Many news outlets that ran fact checks on Trump’s statements have now given up on the practice, simply because there are so many and they come so fast and furious. At a MAGA rally in Wisconsin on Saturday, Trump revved up his MAGA flock by claiming that 100 million illegal immigrants would swarm into the US if Kamala Harris is elected, taking away everything from Americans, including their homes. Getting them out will be a “bloody story” he warned.