In a very passionate article, editor in chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Golderg, details some of the most obscure and outrageous claims about President Trump that I have seen to date. Ofcourse, as someone who also dislikes Trump greatly, it’s easy to blindly accept all of Goldberg’s claims and believe his statements as truth. However, as an aspiring journalist, I have to remember one of the most foundational life lessons in this society: Don’t believe everything you see on the internet.
Goldberg’s main claim is that President Trump has no respect for members of the U.S. military and does not understand the concept of sacrifice without personal gain. These claims are extremely sensitive in a country that honors and respects the sacrifices of its military very deeply, and if they were supported by concrete facts, would surely cause many Americans to be personally offended and outraged at the President. The truth is, I expected more out of the editor in chief because the Atlantic has a highly-esteemed reputation as being a reliable news source, but every single account and source that was cited in this article was anonymous.
The second paragraph starts with one of many extravagant claims that President Trump “did not believe it important to honor American war dead,” and his source for this comes from “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day.” Throughout the remainder of the article, Goldberg references people with firsthand knowledge of the events he references, and many of these sources include very specific quotes that President Trump supposedly said to back-up his claims. If these quotes and anecdotes were confirmed fact, then Goldberg would have very compelling arguments, but because of the fact that every source is 100% anonymous throughout the piece, the claims become less believable as the article continues.
Goldberg references his sources as “witnesses,” “aides,”general officers,” “three sources with direct knowledge,” etc. He uses the most general terms possible to describe his sources that give him all of the quotes and evidence to support his claims. If you were to theoretically accept all of these sources as trustworthy, they would all have high proximity, low independence (since there is nothing to gain if they are remaining anonymous), and an unknown level of expertise.
Through his shocking statements and inclusion of never-before-seen quotes from President Trump, Goldberg succeeds at capturing his audience all the way through. He uses a vehemently aggressive and disgusted tone throughout the piece to ignite the same disgust and passion in his readers that dislike Trump, and in hopes that his Trump-supporting readers will rethink their support.
Again, if any of Goldberg’s sources weren’t anonymous, many of the evidence for his arguments would be logically accurate, however, the fact that he leaves out the names of every source, takes away from the credibility of the article as a whole, and many other of his arguments are not logical. For example, the claim that President Trump believes that the military is beholden to him and not the Constitution is supported by the fact that he employed armed troops during the BLM protests. Although I do not agree with this decision, he is not the first president to use the Insurrection Act, and he technically was in his Constitutional right.
I find it harder to believe that out of the many sources he references, not a single one would feel comfortable sharing their name. Also, assuming that all of these sources actually did have first-hand knowledge of all of the events described, I find it hard to believe that that many people close to the President would be willing to talk to a reporter with specific quotes behind the President’s back. Although, they may truly be motivated through personal dislike towards the President.
Jeffrey Goldberg is a highly awarded, highly experienced journalist, however, he also has been writing extremely anti-Trump articles for many years now. In fact, a majority of his articles for The Atlantic are attacking President Trump. The Atlantic is known to be left-leaning. It’s clear that writing about politics is a very tricky situation because it is hard to separate personal belief from reporting. Golberg’s motivations are clearly to tear down President Trump in any way possible to gain more support for his positions and possibly influence Americans to not re-vote for him. Although there’s no personal gain for him, campaigning his personal beliefs through extremely outlandish claims and opinions is a verified way to get people to actually read his articles and consider his points.
Marissa Zayed 