New section of the official US government website exposes outlets and journalists who, according to the administration, distort facts to attack the president
The White House has taken another bold step in its declared war against the so-called “mainstream media”. A new section was launched on the official government website entitled “Media Offender of the Week”, a kind of public bulletin board where the government points out, directly and by name, which media outlets and journalists have published false or distorted information about presidential actions.
According to information released by the administration itself, the idea is to bring transparency, hold responsible outlets that repeatedly make mistakes and, in the government’s words, “expose the bad faith of sectors of the press that manufacture narratives”.
Who’s on the list: the first “offenders”
Right at the launch of the page, the government identified the following as offenders:
- CBS News
- The Boston Globe
- The Independent
And he also named journalists by name who had conducted reports considered “misleading” or “out of context”. For the White House, these articles would have created the false impression that the president defended extreme measures against opposition congressmen amid a controversy involving a video about “illegal orders to the army”.
The government argues that mainstream media coverage omitted important contexts and, in some cases, presented the president’s speeches out of sequence, generating misinterpretation.
The trigger: the controversy that triggered the offensive
The launch of the section comes shortly after a controversy that took over the news in the USA. Six Democratic congressmen released a video in which they suggested that the military should resist “illegal orders.” Traditional media turned the episode into a political storm, insinuating that the president was encouraging authoritarian actions.
The government reacted harshly, accusing these parliamentarians of promoting “institutional instability”. According to the White House, several media outlets “deliberately distorted” the meaning of presidential statements and transformed a legal debate into a crisis narrative.
The page includes a “Gallery of Shame”
In addition to the “Offender of the Week”, the White House has put up a permanent list called “Shame Gallery”, which brings together vehicles considered to be repeat offenders of serious errors, including mass circulation newspapers, traditional TV stations and influential columnists.
The page classifies infractions into categories such as:
- “Systematic bias”
- “Lack of context”
- “False statement”
- “Editorial manipulation”
- “Journalistic misconduct”
According to the administration, the objective is to document patterns of behavior, not just isolated episodes.
Reactions: praise, criticism and warning from experts
The initiative had an immediate impact. Conservative sectors praised the measure, stating that they have been denouncing media bias for years and see the new system as a necessary tool to combat narrative monopoly. On the other hand, press organizations and defenders of freedom of expression criticized the action, accusing the government of creating a list of “political targets”. For these groups, the measure could intimidate journalists and reduce editorial independence.
Experts also warn of the risk of the initiative being interpreted as State interference in the work of the media, even if outlets remain free to publish whatever they want.
The background: a relationship in crisis
The relationship between the White House and major media outlets had already been deteriorating. In recent months, the government has openly criticized headlines considered biased, denounced statistical distortions and complained about errors that, according to the administration, “curiously never occur in favor of the president”. The new website, for many, is just the formalization of a dispute that was already open.
A movement that marks a position
With the creation of the “Media Offender of the Week”, the American government changes its tone and takes a more combative stance. He doesn’t just respond to the press — he now exposes, organizes and archives what he considers to be intentional errors.
Whether this will be seen as an advance in transparency or as a threat to journalistic freedom will depend on who judges. But one thing is certain: the relationship between government and media in the US has just entered a new phase — much tougher, more direct and noisier.
*This text does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Jovem Pan.
