In a world where political transparency is often seen as a rarity, President Trump has recently set a remarkable record. In just the first month of his current term in 2025, he has fielded over a thousand questions from the press. Compare that to President Obama, who answered only 161 questions in his first month, or President Biden’s meager 141. It seems that Trump’s unorthodox approach to media interactions is stirring up quite the controversy in Washington, D.C., a place notorious for its opacity.
The spectacle of Trump sitting down for an hour-long cabinet meeting, fielding tough questions from mostly hostile media outlets, is a sight to behold. Most presidential pool events are akin to watching paint dry—brief, mundane, and typically devoid of meaningful interaction. Yet, under Trump’s leadership, the dynamics shift dramatically. Reporters are given unprecedented access, turning pool events into something that more resembles a gladiatorial contest as they lob questions at the President. Unlike Biden, who often avoids the fray, Trump embraces the chaos, much to the chagrin of his communication team and delight of his supporters.
Adding fuel to the fire, Caroline Leavitt, a member of Trump’s team, recently announced changes to how the White House determines its press pool. Unlike previous administrations that relied on the White House Correspondents Association, Trump’s press team will now also include lesser-known outlets that have long been sidelined. This decision has sparked outrage among legacy media outlets that are struggling to contend with the evolving media landscape. After years of controlling the narrative, they’re clearly not happy about this new level of transparency that allows different voices to participate.
The media’s reaction has been swift and filled with accusations of breaking tradition. Yet, one must wonder: what tradition? The public has long seen journalists transform from watchdogs of democracy into mouthpieces for the establishment. Trump’s candidness has turned the tables, and traditional media has resorted to moaning about losing control. This sentiment is echoed by the head of the White House Correspondents Association, who ostensibly champions a nonpartisan press but conveniently reveals biases veiled in virtue-signaling language.
In stark contrast to Trump’s open-door policy, President Biden seems to have preferred a more guarded approach. He often appears with a card dictating which friendly reporters he can call upon, creating an environment that feels more like a staged production than a genuine engagement with the press. The difference couldn’t be more glaring; Trump opens the floor to a barrage of questions, while Biden selectively engages, often resulting in the classic “press conference thumbs up” from an assembly of accommodated reporters.
As the dust settles following these media shifts, many are left wondering what the future holds for the relationship between the White House and the press. Will the legacy outlets adjust to this new reality, or will they continue clinging to outdated methods that no longer serve a democratic society? Only time will tell. One thing is clear, though: Trump’s commitment to transparency and accessibility is shaking up the norms, and the response from the media suggests a significant anxiety about what that entails for the future of political discourse in America.
