Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]


** OPINION
------------------------------------------------------------


** Good on the media for calling out President Trump’s falsehoods on Ukraine
------------------------------------------------------------
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, and President Donald Trump in a photo from September 2024 in New York City. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson, File)

Just when you thought our politics couldn’t get any more bizarre and divisive and distressing, something else transpired.

As happens far too often these days, it was something said by President Donald Trump.

In a truly stunning post on Truth Social ([link removed]) , Trump called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy “A Dictator without Elections.” He also called Zelenskyy a “modestly successful comedian” and, just as he did a day earlier, seemingly blamed Zelenskyy for starting the war with Russia even though it was Russia that invaded Ukraine. Trump wrote that Zelenskyy “talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn’t be won, that never had to start, but a War that he, without the U.S. and ‘TRUMP,’ will never be able to settle.”

In a positive sign, the media appropriately and responsibly covered Trump’s comments. For example, The New York Times’ Andrew E. Kramer, Constant Meheut and Anton Troianovski wrote ([link removed]) that Trump’s post was “filled with falsehoods.” They would add about Trump, “As he did in making his assertions a day earlier, he misrepresented verifiable facts.”

Not only did the Times repeatedly point out Trump’s lies in its main news story, but it also published another story from Matthew Mpoke Bigg with the headline: “Trump Falsely Says Ukraine Started the War With Russia. Here Is What to Know.” ([link removed])

This is how you do it. Not only do you call out what is wrong, but you spell out exactly what is true.

The Washington Post’s Siobhan O'Grady, David L. Stern and Serhiy Morgunov pointed out ([link removed]) that Trump’s comments were “immediately the top of the news in Russian media outlets.”

In fact, Fox News chief political analyst Brit Hume, who usually backs conservatives, retweeted Trump’s post and wrote on X ([link removed]) , “Music to the ears of Vladimir Putin.”

Even Trump’s former Vice President, Mike Pence, tweeted ([link removed]) , “Mr. President, Ukraine did not ‘start’ this war. Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.”

Most of the responsible American media continued to call out Trump for his post.

NBC News’ Daryna Mayer, Astha Rajvanshi and Rebecca Shabad wrote ([link removed]) in the second paragraph of their story that Trump’s post contained a “number of inaccuracies.”

CBS News’ Caitlin Yilek noted ([link removed]) that “Trump inflated the amount of assistance the U.S. has sent to Ukraine since Russia's invasion in 2022.”

On and on it went with many outlets pointing out Trump’s falsehoods and noting that his rhetoric echoed Russian talking points.

Of course, not all media did the responsible thing. Fox News’ Laura Ingraham tweeted ([link removed]) , “Trump is acutely aware that there is still a strong contingent on the Hill hell-bent on blowing billions of your hard tax dollars on a hopeless war. Time to stop the bloodshed.”

Former NBC News journalist Chuck Todd retweeted Ingraham’s post and wrote ([link removed]) , “In case you are wondering how Kool-Aid drinkers are going to find a way to defend the crazy Russian talking points coming out of the president’s social media feed and mouth…”

Zelenskyy himself said that Trump was living in a “web of disinformation.”

Trump falsely claimed Ukrainian polls show Zelenskyy isn’t popular. Zelenskyy responded by saying, “I wish Trump’s team had more truth. Because none of this is having a positive effect on Ukraine.”

While the actual news of the day — Trump’s disturbing accusations and mocking of Zelenskyy, deepening their feud and likely complicating peace talks — was depressing, at least the capable and reliable media covered the story with truth and integrity.


** CBS News news
------------------------------------------------------------

Another shakeup at CBS News. Adrienne Roark, who was named president of the Paramount Global news division last year, is leaving the company at the end of the month to take over as chief content officer at local TV company Tegna.

The departure comes at a tumultuous time for CBS News.

Variety’s Brian Steinberg writes ([link removed]) , “CBS News is under an array of pressures. The news division is at the center of of a case levied against Paramount Global by now-President Donald Trump, who claims editing of a “60 Minutes” interview of former Vice President Kamala Harris had an influence on the 2024 election. Executives at Paramount Global have mulled settling the case, because they fear the White House could slow down its deal to be acquired by David Ellison’s Skydance Media. The FCC recently asked for transcripts and video tied to the Harris interview. Meanwhile, Paramount, which has already made massive cost cuts, is expected to make more once the Skydance deal is consummated.”


** Not followed and unfriended
------------------------------------------------------------
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, left, and Elon Musk. (AP Photo/Manu Fernandez, Stephan Savoia)

Tech billionaires Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg might have a lot of power these days, but the majority of Americans don’t like them. That’s the findings of a Pew Research Center survey ([link removed]) released Wednesday.

The poll conducted from Jan. 27 to Feb. 2 found that more than half (54%) of Americans had an “unfavorable view” of Musk, who besides his companies (including the social media platform X) is working inside the U.S. government with President Donald Trump. The poll includes 34% of those who have a “very unfavorable opinion” of Musk.

For Zuckerberg, the CEO and founder of Meta, it’s even worse. Two-thirds of Americans have an unfavorable view of Zuckerberg, and that includes 26% who have a “very unfavorable view.”

Not surprisingly, the breakdown by political party makes a difference when it comes to Musk, who is tight with Trump. When it comes to Republicans, 73% have a favorable view of Musk, compared to 85% of Democrats who have an unfavorable view.

Zuckerberg, however, isn’t favored by either party — 60% of Republicans and 76% of Democrats have an unfavorable opinion of him.


** A friendly chat
------------------------------------------------------------

On Tuesday, Fox News aired Sean Hannity’s joint interview with President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who is heading up the Department of Government Efficiency and, at the moment, appears to be the country’s second-most-powerful person.

The interview went pretty much as you would expect. The Washington Post wrote ([link removed]) , “Host Sean Hannity showered the pair with praise — and the president and his adviser were full of compliments for each other.”

The xxxxxx’s Sam Stein tweeted ([link removed]) , “You have to admire Sean Hannity's ability to get Trump and Musk for an exclusive, hour-long interview and make absolutely NO news from it.”

Then again, what did we think was going to happen? It’s Hannity, not Mike Wallace.

Anyway, the Post’s Niha Masih, Jacob Bogage, Natalie Allison, Jeff Stein and Maegan Vazquez had “5 key moments from Trump and Musk’s joint interview on Fox News.” ([link removed]) And here’s Axios’ Rebecca Falconer with “Key takeaways from Trump and Musk's ‘Hannity’ interview.” ([link removed])


** Unconstitutional censorship?
------------------------------------------------------------

Well, this is certainly a troubling story. A judge in Mississippi forced The Clarksdale Press Register to delete an editorial that criticized city officials. The city was suing over a Feb. 8 editorial ([link removed]) that called out officials for failing to notify the public about a hearing on proposed tax increases.

The editorial started with a reasonable argument: “Your Clarksdale Press Register will be the first to say that a sin tax that would pay police to fight crime in Clarksdale is a good idea. So why did the City of Clarksdale fail to go to the public with details about this idea before it sent a resolution to the Mississippi Legislature seeking a two-percent tax on alcohol, marijuana and tobacco?”

Yet earlier this week, without even a hearing, Hinds County Chancery Court Judge Crystal Wise Martin ordered the newspaper to remove the editorial from its website. The judge wrote the case involves allegations of “defamation against public figures through actual malice in reckless disregard of the truth and interferes with their legitimate function to advocate for legislation they believe would help their municipality during this current legislative cycle.”

The mayor of Clarksdale, Chuck Espy, wrote in a Facebook post ([link removed]) , “Thank GOD! The City of Clarksdale WON today! The judge ruled in our favor that a newspaper cannot tell a malicious lie and not be held liable. The newspaper had to take down a false story that they printed. The only thing that I ask, that no matter what you print just let it be the truth; be it good or bad. Thank you GOD for a judicial system.”

Espy didn’t write and it still isn’t clear what the “malicious” lies were. As The Independent’s Alex Woodward wrote ([link removed]) , “A city clerk even submitted an affidavit admitting she ‘failed’ to notify the media about the hearing.”

Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in a statement, “It's hard to imagine a more unconstitutional order than one compelling a newspaper to take down an editorial critical of the government. And it's particularly ironic when the editorial in question is about government secrecy undermining the public trust. If anyone previously trusted the secretive officials involved in this censorship campaign, they shouldn't now.”

Stern added, “The underlying lawsuit here appears frivolous for any number of reasons. But even in constitutionally permissible defamation lawsuits, it's been well-established law for decades that the remedy for plaintiffs is monetary damages, not censorship orders.”


** Media tidbits
------------------------------------------------------------
* The Washington Post’s Jeremy Barr and John Hudson with “State Dept. orders cancellation of news subscriptions around the world.” ([link removed]) Barr and Hudson write that the White House memo “directed procurement teams at embassies and consulates to prioritize the termination of contracts with six news organizations in particular: the Economist, the New York Times, Politico, Bloomberg News, the Associated Press and Reuters.”
* One of the notable absentees from the 50th anniversary special of “Saturday Night Live” was Dana Carvey, a cast member from 1986 to 1993. What made Carvey’s absence curious was that he has appeared on the show often in the past year, usually playing Joe Biden. Well, now we know why Carvey missed the show. His rep told The New York Post ([link removed]) that Carvey had the flu and was unable to travel.
* Speaking of the “SNL50” special, WSLS, the local NBC affiliate in Roanoke, Virginia, is apologizing to its viewers ([link removed]) for cutting the final 13 minutes after the special ran past the originally scheduled ending time. As a result, viewers missed Paul McCartney’s final medley of three Beatles songs from “Abbey Road.” WSLS vice president and general manager Jaimie León wrote that the affiliate was working with NBC about airing an encore performance of the show’s final moments.


** Hot type
------------------------------------------------------------
* Superb reporting from The Athletic’s Matthew Futterman and Charlie Eccleshare in “The ‘relationship of dependence’ between a barred coach and a Wimbledon champion.” ([link removed])
* Big hockey game tonight on ESPN as the USA takes on Canada in the championship of the 4 Nations Face-Off. This is a rematch of last Saturday’s game when there were three fights in the first nine seconds of the game. The U.S. won the game, 3-1. The Wall Street Journal’s Jason Gay writes, “Drop Your Gloves! Are Team USA and Canada Delivering the Hockey Showdown of the Decade?” ([link removed])


** More resources for journalists
------------------------------------------------------------
* Gain a deeper understanding of Polarization in America and Christian Nationalism. Enroll now ([link removed]) .
* Elevate your editing expertise with the Poynter ACES Advanced Certificate. Enroll now ([link removed]) .
* Immigration Matters ([link removed]) : a tip sheet with resources and story ideas.

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) .
[link removed]
Help Poynter strengthen journalism, truth and democracy. ([link removed])
GIVE NOW ([link removed])

ADVERTISE ([link removed]) // DONATE ([link removed]) // LEARN ([link removed]) // JOBS ([link removed])
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here. ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20for%20Poynter
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
© All rights reserved Poynter Institute 2025
801 Third Street South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
If you don't want to receive email updates from Poynter, we understand.
You can change your subscription preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe from all Poynter emails ([link removed]) .