Julian CortesThe press has faced a mix of severe attacks and valid criticism regarding its coverage of the attack on former U.S. President Donald Trump, a key figure in the 2024 race against his rival, Joe Biden.
Responsible journalism requires careful real-time reporting and subsequent confirmation of facts. The coverage must balance between initial uncertainty and later verified information, avoiding speculative or biased reporting.
Initial social media and TV images showed Trump being escorted offstage by security, prompting a search for earlier footage. This footage captured gunshots interrupting his speech but provided no clear evidence of weapons, injuries, or a confirmed attack on Trump.
The sounds of gunfire led to preventive security measures, but there was no immediate proof that Trump was targeted. Despite this, some media reported unverified claims, such as “Trump falls off the stage,” fueling criticism and accusations of selective alarmism.
Images of Trump with a bloodied ear circulated, but authorities had not yet confirmed if the injury was caused by a gunshot. Responsible reporting requires caution until concrete evidence is available. The media should avoid premature conclusions and use terms like “alleged” when evidence is not fully confirmed.
As the situation developed, reports confirmed that Trump was slightly injured by a gunshot but was safe. The shooter was dead, one audience member was killed, and another was critically injured. The Secret Service confirmed this information.
Additional details emerged, including a person being carried out, eyewitness accounts of the shooter, and evidence of the shooter’s death and weapon. The FBI later identified the shooter as Thomas Crooks and considered the act an assassination attempt on Trump.
In light of the evidence, most media outlets reported the situation accurately, avoiding misinformation. Conspiracy theories were limited to individuals like André Janones, a Brazilian federal deputy involved in controversial activities, and Guilherme Boulos, a São Paulo federal deputy and mayoral candidate.
 |
| Twitter image: of Brazilian Congressman André Janones, supporter of President Lula. |
The New York Times and Washington Post were also criticized for closing their Sunday, August 14 print editions with generic headlines: “Trump Injured But Safe After Shooting Incident – Suspected Shooter and Rally Spectator Killed”; “Trump injured in shooting – POSSIBLE ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT – Shooter and one other person dead; former president is ‘fine’”. The exact moment of closure on Saturday night is unknown, but there is valid criticism of the use of the term “shooting” in the title, despite the WP’s subtitle, which dilutes the shooter’s responsibility for the crime amid an exchange of gunfire, followed by cool response from the “snipers”.
The media’s selective sensationalism, before the attack, compromises the necessary journalistic prudence in live coverage of complex events, placing it alongside reprehensible behavior and opening the way for malicious opportunistic attacks.
Share and comment to expand the search for truth with Truths Report!