A controversial move by the Trump administration disrupts decades-old press coverage traditions at the White House.
According to the Daily Mail, the White House removed HuffPost, Reuters, and foreign press representatives from the traditional press pool ahead of President Donald Trump's first Cabinet meeting, following through on press secretary Karoline Leavitt's declaration to control media access.
The White House's decision marks a significant departure from longstanding practices where the White House Correspondents' Association determined the rotation for daily pool coverage. This change affects journalists who have covered presidential activities in confined spaces for decades, with the administration now claiming authority over press pool composition.
The exclusion extended beyond HuffPost and Reuters, affecting the Associated Press' reporter and photographer who were previously removed from the pool over disputes about geographical terminology. The White House demanded AP use "Gulf of America" instead of "Gulf of Mexico" in their reporting, leading to their indefinite suspension.
HuffPost's veteran White House reporter S.V. Date, scheduled to represent print outlets on Wednesday, was replaced by an Axios reporter. Date emphasized his decade-long unblemished record of accurate reporting across multiple administrations, suggesting the decision wasn't based on journalistic merit.
The White House's stance remained firm, with an official stating that the "WHCA pool that HuffPost was a part of no longer exists." However, press secretary Leavitt later indicated HuffPost would maintain some form of pool access.
Top editors from major wire services—the Associated Press, Reuters, and Bloomberg—issued a joint statement condemning the White House's actions. They emphasized the crucial role of independent press access in democratic governance and warned about the potential impact on information dissemination to communities and financial markets.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the administration's position, stating:
We want more outlets and new outlets to have a chance to take part in the press pool, to cover the administration's unprecedented achievements up close, front-and-center. As you all know for decades, a group of D.C.-based journalists, the White House Correspondents' Association, has long dictated which journalists get to ask questions of the president of the United States in these most intimate spaces.
The administration added The Blaze's Chris Bedford to the pool, representing what they termed "new media," while maintaining their position on restricting traditional press access.
Eugene Daniels, president of the WHCA, revealed the organization had received no prior notice about the changes. The National Press Club's President Mike Balsamo condemned the move as a direct challenge to press freedom, urging immediate reversal.
Fox News Channel's Senior White House Correspondent Jacqui Heinrich criticized the administration's claims about empowering people, arguing that the WHCA's democratic election by full-time White House press corps members ensures fair representation and resource allocation.
The New York Times' Peter Baker drew parallels to Putin's early reign, comparing the White House's actions to the Kremlin's press pool control tactics. This prompted a sharp response from Leavitt, who dismissed the comparison and criticized what she called "left-wing stenographers posing as journalists."
The Trump administration's recent press pool modifications represent a significant shift in White House media relations, directly challenging decades-old protocols established by the White House Correspondents' Association. The decision to exclude HuffPost, Reuters, and foreign press representatives from covering the president's first Cabinet meeting signals a new approach to controlling media access, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt asserting White House authority over press pool composition. As legal challenges continue and media organizations unite in protest, the future of traditional White House press coverage remains uncertain amid growing concerns about press freedom and democratic transparency.
