{"id":386756,"date":"2025-08-31T07:34:10","date_gmt":"2025-08-31T07:34:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/386756\/"},"modified":"2025-08-31T07:34:10","modified_gmt":"2025-08-31T07:34:10","slug":"trumps-anti-press-tactics-are-bad-enough-in-the-us-now-reform-is-importing-them-to-the-midlands-jon-allsop","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/386756\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump\u2019s anti-press tactics are bad enough in the US. Now Reform is importing them to the Midlands | Jon Allsop"},"content":{"rendered":"

On the day that he returned to office in January, Donald Trump signed an order<\/a> renaming the Gulf of Mexico the \u201cGulf of America\u201d. A few days later, the Associated Press, a leading global news agency that is also a linguistic bible for newsrooms across the US, said that while it would acknowledge Trump\u2019s order, it would mostly continue to use the original name<\/a>. In response, the White House banned AP journalists<\/a> from certain media availabilities. Trump accused the agency of failing to follow the law. The AP said the government was trying to dictate what words it can and cannot use.<\/p>\n

This week, Nottinghamshire\u2019s Reform-led county council said that it would impose a sweeping ban on the Nottingham Post, its affiliated website and BBC-funded reporters who work there. At issue, apparently, was a story that the paper had written about a proposed reorganisation of local government. The leader of the council insisted that he welcomes scrutiny, but has a \u201cduty\u201d to combat \u201cmisinformation\u201d. The Post\u2019s editor called the decision<\/a> \u201ca massive attack on local democracy\u201d \u2013 and it\u2019s hard to disagree.<\/p>\n

The ban has clear echoes of Trump\u2019s tactics, and some<\/a> critics<\/a> said as much explicitly. In the US, there is a clear longer-term trend<\/a> of Republican officials imposing poorly justified restrictions on the press. But one doesn\u2019t need to look as far as that to understand the Nottinghamshire ban. Indeed, Reform has been accused before of shutting out reporters, or otherwise treating them with disrespect: last year, the party reportedly excluded certain adversarial outlets and journalists from its conference<\/a>; earlier this summer, Reform\u2019s leader Nigel Farage accused local reporters in Scotland<\/a> of helping to coordinate protests against him. It all seems to add up, on both sides of the Atlantic and beyond, to a moment in which hard-right politicians, in particular, feel that they don\u2019t need to engage with traditional news outlets to get their message out, and that they won\u2019t suffer electoral consequences for shutting them out. They might even benefit from doing so, turning the media into a foil as part of a broader war against the establishment.<\/p>\n

And yet, there are also reasons to doubt these conclusions, or at least to texture them. It\u2019s true that Trump, for example, has shut out journalists whose stories displease him. (In addition to the AP imbroglio, his White House recently barred a reporter from the Wall Street Journal<\/a> from a trip to the UK, after that paper reported unflatteringly on Trump\u2019s alleged ties to Jeffrey Epstein.) At the same time, though, Trump will routinely talk to pretty much anyone who will listen, the mainstream media very much included. (Earlier this year, he called the editor of the Atlantic a \u201csleazebag\u201d \u2013 then granted him<\/a> an interview not long after.) Indeed, Trump has long used media coverage successfully to set the political agenda.<\/p>\n

In the UK, Farage seems to be using the same playbook. Sure, he has leaned, in particular, on the rightwing press. But such papers aren\u2019t necessarily natural allies for Reform given their deep cultural ties to the Conservatives<\/a>. And Farage has sucked up oxygen in more hostile quarters, too. This week, just as Nottinghamshire council was banning journalists, Farage was being praised, by Politico<\/a>, for answering questions about his mass deportation plans with a directness that other parties should seek to emulate.<\/p>\n

Trump has clearly proven that there aren\u2019t hard electoral consequences for press-bashing. But there are still important differences between UK and US political culture. Trust in the media is at a low ebb here<\/a>, too. But in the recent past, rightwing political figures who have used Trumpian rhetoric to deflect blame for their own failures on to the media haven\u2019t always been successful. Dominic Cummings goaded the press after his Covid-era drive to Barnard Castle, but could not escape<\/a> massive public anger. Boris Johnson dodging tough questions \u2013 from the Today programme<\/a>, for example, which his government boycotted \u2013 didn\u2019t spare him from the glare of scandal in the long run.<\/p>\n

This doesn\u2019t guarantee that the leaders of Nottinghamshire council will suffer from banning their local paper. Indeed, it might very well be to Reform\u2019s advantage to let Farage suck up attention nationally while dodging scrutiny for the actions of the party\u2019s councillors across the country; the party surely wants the media talking about immigration, not the reorganisation of local government. And local outlets might seem an easy target, diminished in power and reach in an age of cuts to local news and unchained online discourse.<\/p>\n

President Trump meets members of the media at the White House. Photograph: Jonathan Ernst\/Reuters<\/p>\n

And yet Reform\u2019s leadership of councils is an important test for the party in a country where voters still, to some extent, value competent governance. \u201cIf Reform can\u2019t even face questions from the Nottingham Post,\u201d the Conservative party chair Kevin Hollinrake wondered this week<\/a>, \u201cwhat hope is there that they could ever face the serious responsibilities of government?\u201d He\u2019s surely not the only one asking that question. Even in the US, where the culture of political press-bashing is more entrenched, local Republican legislators in some states are cooperating<\/a> with proposals to steer more resources to their dwindling local news outlets. This isn\u2019t some act of altruism, advocates say, but one born of the realisation that they need voters to know what they\u2019ve been doing when elections roll around.<\/p>\n

The Reform ban might hold. But at some point, local Reform councillors will want to trumpet an achievement, and when they do, it would not be a massive surprise if they go running to the Nottingham Post. Politicians can, of course, reach voters on social media these days. But established local news brands can still confer prestige. And good publicity is good publicity. For now, Trump hasn\u2019t let up on the AP<\/a>. But he hasn\u2019t been shy about showcasing its journalism when it suits him. An artwork based on the iconic image of Trump pumping his fist after his attempted assassination<\/a> last year now adorns a White House wall<\/a>. It was taken by an AP photographer.<\/p>\n