The Atlantic announced today that its editor was inadvertently added to a group text including the Vice President, CIA Director, Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor where they discussed Yemen war moves and other matters of national security. The Trump administration’s carelessness would soon be outdone by the squeamishness of the magazine.
Editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg took the scoop of a lifetime and chose to act as gatekeeper, publishing only the most innocuous tidbits like what emojis different officials used and their goofy backslapping instead of the actual news. It is one of the worst cases of media paternalism, what I call highchair journalism — open up for your infotainment, here comes the airplane: Trump officials used emojis, LOL! — but also a disturbing reminder of how much the mainstream media have been co-opted by the national security state.
Goldberg makes clear in his article that his standard for publication isn’t newsworthiness, but the mere possibility that the information “could conceivably” be used by adversaries of the United States. The media isn’t or shouldn’t be in the business of helping the government. Like an attorney, the media are supposed to have a duty to their client, the public.
Consider how Goldberg describes his decision to not publish a text sent by CIA Director John Ratcliffe based merely on the possibility that the information “might be interpreted as related to” ongoing intelligence matters:
Then, at 8:26 a.m., a message landed in my Signal app from the user “John Ratcliffe.” The message contained information that might be interpreted as related to actual and current intelligence operations.”
That’s exactly the kind of news the public needs. Is the Houthi campaign cover for a broader war with Iran? How serious is the Trump administration’s consideration of the effects? Or the potential for escalation? Or the potential for any kind of success?
And the people that they're stationed there to kill don't matter?