Book Review: The Presidents vs. The Press: The Endless Battle Between the White House and the Media

A Good History That Misses An Opportunity for Useful Analysis

I read The Presidents vs. The Press: The Endless Battle Between the White House and the Media – From the Founding Fathers to Fake News by Harold Holzer hoping that a historic perspective of the Presidents and the Media would provide some clarity on the current chaos in news reporting. I may have been hoping for too much.

First, the positives. In The Presidents vs. The Press Holzer tells the stories of how 16 selected Presidents, from George Washington to Donald Trump, responded to the members of the news media.

All of these Presidents felt that the media treated them unfairly and did not report accurately. However, most fully understood that, in a free society, the media was going to continue to exist. So each of these Presidents tried, in their own way, to manage the message.

Holzer reviews the wide variation in the Presidents’ strategies. For example, John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798 which criminalized many aspects of press reporting. Abraham Lincoln shut down presses to prevent disclosure of strategic information during the Civil War. Theodore Roosevelt befriended members of the press inviting them for informal visits during his noontime shaves. And Ronald Reagan limited his remarks to the press to brief remarks made while on the move from one location to another.

Probably most effective were those Presidents who used new forms of communication to bypass the press entirely and take their message directly to the public. For example, Franklin Roosevelt used the radio for his fireside chats. John Kennedy used televised press conferences. Barak Obama prepared his own public relations productions to send out over social media. And Donald Trump makes extensive use of Twitter.

I am a news junkie that grew up in the 60s and 70s. Holzer’s recounting of press treatment of events like the Viet Nam War protests, Watergate, Billygate, Iran Contra, the Whitewater Scandal and Travelgate were like a trip down memory lane for me. They are all part of what is truly a well written history of how these 16 Presidents have been portrayed by the press and how they have responded. I wholly recommend this book for readers who are interested in reading such a history.

But, there are also a few negatives. This book is written from the Presidents’ perspective. It deals specifically with how each of the Presidents responded to his particular treatment by the press. Holzer pretty much refrains from giving any critique of the press’ actions. Instead, he describes specific actions taken by members of the press solely to provide a basis for the President’s response.

Holzer explains how the public’s sources of news have evolved over the years from written press, to broadcast media to cable news to social media. We now have the opportunity to obtain our news from hundreds of sources. But many of us elect sources that agree with our preconceived ideas of the truth. Holzer might have expressed his opinion of what constitutes responsible journalism in this current environment. He also might have pointed to one or more members of the press that are currently meeting his definition of what constitutes responsible journalism. His failure to provide this additional material is a missed opportunity.

I give this book 3.5 stars because, while it constitutes a very good history of the relationship between these 16 Presidents and the press, it fails to provide the reader with what would have been a useful perspective on the press’ role in our current environment.