NEED TO KNOW
- The new portal ranks reporters by how emotionally damaging they were to the president.
- “Offenses” include tone, using math, and “being a little snarky.”
- Goal of the site: protect Trump’s peace, hurt journalism’s back.
The White House debuted a new “Media Bias” webpage on Friday, and the country quickly learned it is less a fact-checking tool and more an emotional support diary for President Donald Trump. The administration framed the project as an effort to expose misleading news. Visitors, however, were met with a ranked list titled Reporters Who Hurt Trump’s Feelings This Week. Each name included the alleged offense, the emotional damage score, and a suggested apology format.
The page named the Boston Globe, CBS News, and The Independent as the week’s top offenders. Trump allies praised the rollout, saying it was time to push back against what they call aggressive negativity. Critics argued the portal looks like something built during detention by a middle schooler who lost class president. Either way, the site updates faster than most COVID dashboards.
The Offenses Include Tone, Vibes, and Math
According to the White House, the most common offense is tone. CBS News earned a five star penalty for asking a policy question with what the administration labeled an accusatory eyebrow. The Independent ranked high after publishing a headline that used the phrase experts say, which Trump officials flagged as deeply hostile. One reporter received a three point deduction for using math in a budget question.
Kaelan Dorr, the spokesman behind the project, wrote Prepare to be exposed in a dramatic post on X. He told followers the site restores fairness, even though the key points section under each reporter appears to be copied directly from Trump’s speeches. The White House says the system will grow over time, and new categories may include bad energy, suspicious pauses, and excessive facts.
A Free Press Faces Its Most Petty Review Yet
Some media advocates worry the project undermines free speech and creates pressure on newsrooms. They note the portal now includes a form where Americans can report journalists who seem rude, smug, or too informed. Others argue it provides valuable insight into which stories to read first. Trump critics said the page shows how thin the administration’s skin has become.
Public trust in media has dropped in recent years, and the White House says this tool helps voters understand what it calls the truth. Reporters, however, say the page functions more like a burn book. Most are waiting to see which names appear next. Supporters insist accountability is vital for a healthy nation, even if that accountability looks like a leaderboard of who made the president pout.
The situation continues to evolve. New reporters appear on the list each time Trump opens an app. The administration believes this transparency strengthens democracy. Many Americans believe it strengthens the case for therapy.
It is unclear how long the portal will remain live, but experts predict the answer depends on how many journalists switch to yes sir during press briefings.
I have covered presidents for 30 years, and this is the first time I’ve seen an official government resource dedicated to ranking bad moods
Mark Fillmore, National Press Club
