The press needs to push back as Trump careens into war with Iran

Journalists have a unique role in the runup to war

Donald Trump appears to be about to take the country to war in Iran. That’s the clear message from the news coverage I’m seeing.

That could range from sending B-2s to blow up Iran’s heavily bunkered nuclear facility, to killing the Iranian leader, to bombing Tehran (“evacuate immediately,” he posted on Monday.)

The other clear message from the news coverage, particularly this New York Times story, is that there is no one in Trump’s orbit willing to disagree with whatever he decides, whenever and however he decides it. And we know that spineless Congressional Republicans won't push back either.

All of this makes it more important than ever that media coverage -- rather than being servile and stenographic -- offers a strong argument against going to war.

If nothing else, that’s representative of the public’s overwhelming opposition to the U.S. getting involved.

But beyond that, it's my view that journalists are the repository of certain truths about war: That it is horrible; that it is easier to get into a war than get out of it; that war is often entered into under false pretenses; that when it comes to war, governments lie.

And journalists can uniquely remind their audiences of the humanity of the “other” – in this case, of the Iranian people who would be killed, injured and displaced by American intervention.

(Kudos to CNN and its correspondent Nick Paton Walsh for this unusually empathetic segment on the damage and the death already being wrought by Israel.)

I would like to see some stories about Iranian life, and culture, and history, in addition to breathless stenography from the White House.

I would like reporters to clarify that bombing Iran is, indeed, an act of war – and that it is Congress, not the president, that has the constitutional authority to declare war.

Reporting needs to make it clear that there’s nothing even remotely like a normal deliberative process in this White House -- and explain the value of such a process.

Every article or segment about Trump and war should remind people that Trump is impulsive and underinformed, and surrounded by inexperienced sycophants.

Every time Trump makes an incendiary, juvenile, ridiculous post on Truth Social -- like calling for the evacuation of Tehran, a city larger than New York -- I want reporters to put it in context, rather than just repeat it mindlessly.

Journalists should be asking foreign policy and Iran experts what they think would happen to Iran, and to us, if we went to war. What would further destabilization mean to the region?

I want to see articles speculating on the danger such a war would present to American soldiers in the region.

I want to see coverage of what a war would do to oil prices, gas prices, and inflation.

I want journalists to remember the lessons that should have been learned after Vietnam, and then again after Iraq, and demand answers of public officials before the war – if there’s still time. That means insisting that officials prove to the public that going to war will make things better rather than worse -- and that it's not just about satisfying some short-term urge.

And I want the coverage to amplify the voices of peace, rather than marginalize them.

War is hell. Its horror should make the Washington press corps behave like real journalists, instead of courtiers. It’s a matter of life and death.