Commentary
So Long, 'Donald J. Trump'
- by Joe Mandese @mp_joemandese, September 5, 2018
It’s been nearly six years since I edited the name of the psychopath who murdered 20 children and six teachers at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, out of a column I wrote about the media coverage of the tragedy.
Since then, I have explicitly not used the names of those responsible for massacres in Boston, Las Vegas and other places for the same reason: At least on some level, these maniacs are motivated by public attention, and the least we can do is take that away from them.
I don’t know if objectifying them as common nouns like “shooter,” “killer,” “bomber” or “madman” will make any difference, especially in an era when media is ubiquitous and there are so many other places the public can see their names.
But it’s my personal public stand.
Today, I’m doing the same for Donald J. Trump, who -- at least until he is no longer President -- shall only be referenced in anything I have my byline on as “the President.”
advertisement
advertisement
The reason is the same as the other mentally deranged subjects referenced above. I believe he is a pathological narcissist whose only goal in life is to be the center of media attention.
That may seem ironic, given the way he bashes the media, but that’s kind of the point: He does it mainly so he can get the media’s attention.
I know it’s unlikely the President will notice any more than any of the other maniacs I objectify going forward, but I do believe that media attention is what motivates and feeds him. So consider this my own small way of at least trying to deprive him of that.
Joe Mandese is the Editor in Chief of MediaPost. You can reach Joe at joe@mediapost.com.
Well said. Couldn't strongly agree more.
Well said. Couldn't strongly agree more.
Bravo, Joe!
As we know now, that if some people didn't take papers off his desk, that psychopath could have destroyed even more people.
Wow. Amazing.
Equivalancy drawn between the Sandy Hook mass murderer, and a man that has murdered exactly ZERO children.
I mean, if that piece of garbage that walked into that school just two miles from my brother's home in Newtown had at least gotten our economy back on track like Trump has before murdering those twenty precious children, and six teachers... I might be able to understand.
But no.
Honestly, I can only surmise that the Joe Mandese's of this word have completely lost their minds. I couldn't hold my nose long enough at my polling place to pull the lever for Trump in 2016, but it's ridiculous nonsense like this that make it more likely that I could wear a clothespin on my nose to do just that in 2020. Oh, that, and the fact that Trump knows how to turn an economy around, and how to negotiate better deals for us that will help keep our economy on the right path. More so than the lying, scumbucket Presidents that have preceded him.
Are you Republican, Joe? So many of the ridiculous things that you purport, based upon recent evidence, can only help guarantee "he who shall not be named" FOUR MORE YEARS.
Oh yes, and here's another apoplexy victim purporting that absent people "taking papers off Trump's desk" that more people would be "destroyed."
"Destroyed" as in murdered, Paula? Like those twenty precious five and six year olds, and their teachers?
Are you in "whole hog" too for creating enough outrage among Independents like me, enough to encourage me to actually pull the lever for this buffoon in 2020? That's what the left is doing right now. He's already proven himself impervious to the stuff that the left is making up about him...
Continuing this charade will only help him get re-elected.
@Kenny Kurtz: Sociopathy comes in many forms. The equivalency is the ones that are driven or influenced by a desire for media attention.
For the record, I am not a Republican.
You should be ashamed, dude. People that are driven, or influenced by a desire for media attention?
Isn't that why so many lemmings are spending so much time on social media? Desire for attention? How many American sociopaths are there? 250 million? 300 million?
Trump has always had media attention paid to him throughout his decades as a businessman, and celebrity. For this, you compare him to a mass murderer of innocent children?
That's sick. You're propelling the buffoon to a second term with such dis-eased thought...
@Kenny Kurtz: You should read more closely, dude. I didn't say "people," I said sociopaths. Big difference. Also, I did not compare "the President" to a mass murderer of innocent children. I explained I'm no longer publishing his name was for the same reason: I don't want to contribute to his media pathology.
I think we will all still know who "the President" is.
This country needs to pause and regroup. Yes our President tweets things that "could be" considered wrong by a large portion of the country. He however has not been shown to have broken any laws. Our country has spent 2 years trying to prove he has, as of this writting it has been unsuccessful. That may change and if so address it then. That said Senator Booker just broke the rules of the senate and told the world he did not care. "Bring it on" when told his actions will have consequences.
Our country is more like a third world country than a leader of the world with the #! economy, record unemployment and other great things happening. Our media is divided and continues to throw wood on the fire. Joe so happy you have made this decision and I support your actions. Just do not break the law or rules as Mr Booker has of body that is suppose to direct our country and make the rules. That only leads to more striff and more articles that are attributed to a thrid party.
Ironic to be bashing someone as a "maniac motivated by public attention" by writing and publishing an article about what you're doing...aren't you basically saying "hey, hey look at me...look at me, I'm being an edgy media guy by trying to cleverly compare Trump to a mass killer of children...c'mon look at me".
If you weren't trying to land grab for you own "public attention" you would've quietly went about your business and never used his full name in any of your future articles. However, instead you needed everyone to know you we're going to treat the POTUS no differently than the mass murderer of children...but in no way were you trying to get any attention, right?
I know a number of people who know you Joe and they all consider you a nice guy, but I would have expected you as the head of a publicaton to attempt to be somewhat unbiased. When you write commentaries like this, you make it clear, you are not. Your article is a strong and unfortunate example why many call the media biased and have little faith in its reporting, which is a shame for all of us.
@Rob Walters: Nope. I write a weekly opinion column (Red, White & Blog) about media and politics and this one was about why I personally don't want to contribute to the President's media pathology. I wouldn't mind getting attention for that, but I personally don't want or need any attention for myself. Thank you for yours.
@Terry Carmody: Re. "nice," depending on who you talk to, the jury is still out on that. "Red, White & Blog" is a personal commentary and it reflects some of my biases. It does not necessarily reflect the views of MediaPost, which I do edit. We try not to let our personal biases influence our news reporting.
There is a difference between objective news reporting and subjective commentary. MediaPost publishes both and we always make it explicitly clear which is which. This column is clearly labeled "COMMENTARY" over the headline and above my byline.
For what it's worth, we are an equal opportunity publisher and we welcome other points-of-view on this or other subjects, including those reflected in this comments field.
Joe
Joe Mandese made a statement about media attention; he did not create a false equivalency. It’s important to be a critical, analytic reader, because misconceptions don’t further discussion, they destroy it.
In June, a Pew Research study found members of each party were more likely to classify factual (objective evidence) and opinion statements (a person’s beliefs) as factual when the statements appealed most to their political side.
That’s a problem for media and for the truth. Which is why it’s important to put partisan preferences aside in dangerous circumstances.
According to our national intelligence agencies, the President is casually trashing the Constitution, separation of powers, rule of law and our standing abroad. His autocratic and erratic behavior has alarmed — and been criticized — by members of both parties.
Citing economic gains, largely inherited by the upward trajectory of the Obama years, isn’t the point. The tax plan helps the 1% and 2%, but adds $2 trillion to the national debt, per conservative economists. Degrading and demeaning the press and the rule of law is indefensible in a democracy. That’s not a debate; that’s patriotism.
Denying the President the media attention he craves is one man’s response to chaos. And the commenters have a right to disagree. But it’s important not to devolve into personal attacks or distractions — because it misses the bigger picture at a critical time in our history. For every American — Democrat, Republican or Independent — it must be country before party.
Thank you for your opinion, Fern, that Joe did not create a false equivalency. I couldn't disagree more, especially since he opens the piece with...
It’s been nearly six years since I edited the name of the psychopath who murdered 20 children and six teachers at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, out of a column I wrote about the media coverage of the tragedy.
Since then, I have explicitly not used the names of those responsible for massacres in Boston, Las Vegas and other places for the same reason: At least on some level, these maniacs are motivated by public attention, and the least we can do is take that away from them.
Today, I’m doing the same for Donald J. Trump...
Really, where is the unequivalency?
Joe's extremely strong, even hateful opinions are on full display in each of his pieces. It's a shame, as others have pointed out here, especially since I believe that the worse the demonization (much of it false, clearly) of the man, the WORSE OFF for the Democrats. Why does the left keep making the same mistakes, writing Trump off because it thought he couldn't get elected? Doesn't the left yet see the paradox here? That they're helping Trump by literally absorbing some of the distrust that should be falling on the guy THEMSELVES?
Stop the lying! Stop the vilification! It is not sticking to Teflon Don, and most of it shouldn't because of the dearth of factual evidence attached to the majority of it. IT IS STICKING TO YOU!
Joe... take a long, hot shower.