As the Biden-era immigration crisis surges past 10 million illegal crossings, legacy media outlets have directed their outrage not at the open border, but at the presence of new, pro-Trump media voices in the White House briefing room. The same institutions that remained silent on mass illegal immigration and domestic censorship under the previous administration are now up in arms over reporters who refuse to toe the liberal line.
The White House recently expanded its media access policy to include new outlets, sparking backlash from The New York Times, Politico, and Mother Jones. These outlets criticized the inclusion of conservative podcasters and non-legacy reporters, accusing them of asking “less-adversarial questions” and being “state media.” Ironically, these same organizations cheered the Biden administration’s efforts to silence dissent through backdoor censorship operations involving the FBI, CIA, DOJ, and tech companies.
The criticism comes as the media continues to downplay or ignore the criminal behavior and national security risks posed by illegal aliens, such as Kilmar Garcia—a violent, criminal gang member and illegal immigrant. Outlets like CNN and MSNBC gave more airtime to sympathetic portrayals of Garcia than to the victims of migrant crime, like Patty Morin, whose daughter was murdered by MS-13. Their selective coverage reveals a clear agenda: protect the narrative, even if it means silencing grieving American families.
Meanwhile, former DNI Tulsi Gabbard declassified documents detailing Biden’s domestic surveillance strategy, which included labeling conservative speech as “right-wing terrorism” and partnering with foreign intelligence to target American citizens. This information was used to justify suppressing content through tools like NewsGuard, which arbitrarily rated conservative outlets as “untrustworthy.”
Legacy media elites are also silent on the economic harm to American workers caused by unregulated immigration. In places like Springfield, job replacement by government-sponsored foreign labor programs has sparked local outrage. Yet these developments rarely make national headlines unless they can be spun to criticize President Trump or deflect from Democrat-led failures.
The rise of new media in the White House isn’t a threat to journalism—it’s a long-overdue correction. While old-guard reporters refuse to ask basic questions about border security, deportation failures, and the arrest of NGOs facilitating illegal migration, new media is doing what the legacy press abandoned: holding the administration accountable.
The outrage over a few new media seats is not about journalistic standards; it’s about narrative control. The same reporters who dismiss voter ID laws and border walls as oppressive gladly enjoy ID checks and protected press access. Their reaction to a handful of conservative voices proves one thing: competition in their own backyard is more intolerable to them than an unchecked border crisis endangering American lives.
