Chilling Effect

One of the under reported concerns of the Trump era is the possibility that other politicians will see the president’s political success as a sign that his strategies and tactics are the right ones and they should be emulated.

Key to Trump’s playbook are; the absence of shame, the willingness to survive rather than avoid negative news coverage, and the use of the threat of retribution as a means to silence the opposition.

It is the third tactic, the threat of retribution, that could be especially effective at the local level. There have been several examples recently of Trump using the threat of legal action to keep the news media in its place. The most glaring case was the decision by ABC News – and its parent the Disney Corporation – to settle a lawsuit with Trump at a cost of $15 million in what was a very weak argument against the network.

If politicians at a local or state level were inclined to use the threat of legal action to halt negative news coverage it might be very effective. Locally owned news organizations have small profit margins and are notoriously frugal. Given the option of standing by tough reporting or footing the bill for a long court fight, most local news organizations would opt for an apology or some other less painful way out.

The same can be said for local news organizations owned by national chains. Most big chains are in the advertising business more than they are in the local journalism business. If coverage threatens the bottom line, the bottom line wins.

On the campaign trail we have already seen candidates for office use the tactic of ignoring negative news coverage and blaming that coverage on the “fake news media.” It seems like a good bet to assume that at some point a local politician will use actual legal action as a means to chill critical coverage in the hope that the target news organization does not have the financial resources to fight back.

Bottom Line: This tactic has nothing to do with the merits, it’s all about who has more money to spend on lawyers.

A version of this story was originally published on our sister site TheLaurelCT.

Worth Watching

Before last year’s election, Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy(D) was being mentioned as a possible Secretary of State in the Harris administration. When Harris lost the speculation came to a halt.

Since the election, Murphy has been a regular and noticeable presence on television and in print warning of what he sees as the dangers of the incoming Trump administration. Many, if not most other leading Democrats have been holding their fire, but Murphy has been aggressively out front.

It is a truism of national politics that partisans who are recognized as willing voices for the opposition are rewarded with abundant, positive news coverage and that kind of coverage often leads to speculation about higher office.

Even before the Biden campaign turned into the Harris campaign, Murphy was being mentioned as a possible candidate for president or vice president. Stamford native and MSNBC host Jen Psaki mentioned him as a perfect VP for Harris before Harris selected Governor Tim Walz.

There is no doubt Murphy is concerned about how Trump will govern over the next four years. He has good reason to be concerned. It is also true that the first step toward national leadership is leadership, and post election Murphy is clearly taking the lead.

Bottom Line: Murphy is about to(and in some cases already has) add his name to the list of Connecticut senators who have been mentioned as possible candidates for president, vice president, or high cabinet positions.

A version of this story was originally posted on our sister site; TheLaurelCT.

The Relevance of Opinion Essays

In recent years newspaper opinion pages have been on the decline. Statistics show they are among the least read sections of a newspaper, in print or online. Yet there is no shortage of opinion journalism out there.

Despite the low readership, opinion essays whether published in print or on a digital platform still carry weight and they carry the most weight with influential audiences who consider the opinions of community thought leaders to be essential reading. A good example recently appeared locally

Former Republican Connecticut State Senator Mark Nielsen announced earlier this month that he will vote for Kamala Harris for president. The headline on his CT Insider op-ed piece  was- “I Was A Republican State Senator. I’m voting for Harris.”

When he served in the state legislature Nielsen was a pro-choice, fiscal hawk. By the end of his essay he concludes that Harris is a centrist and the only rational choice in this year’s presidential election.

This is a good example of an op-ed with legs beyond Connecticut. It is an argument that once published can re-purposed on multiple platforms from now until Election Day. It challenges people to test their own opinions and may give others the permission they are looking for to change their minds in one direction or the other.

Bottom Line: Don’t believe people who say the opinion page has lost its power to influence public debate. The power is still there it is simply applied in different ways.