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


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


** Trump sues Murdoch’s Journal and sends a familiar warning to the rest of the press
------------------------------------------------------------
Activists put up a poster showing Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein near the U.S. Embassy in London last Thursday. (AP Photo/Thomas Krych)

There are many notable things about President Donald Trump suing The Wall Street Journal over its Jeffrey Epstein-Trump story, but two stand out.

First, the Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch, the same media mogul behind the Trump-friendly Fox News. Murdoch arguably did more than anyone to help Trump reach the White House. Twice.

Second, as CNN’s Brian Stelter pointed out in his “Reliable Sources” newsletter ([link removed]) , Trump is suing the Journal while he is a sitting president. His other lawsuits against media companies, such as those against ABC News and CBS (owned by Paramount), were filed before he became president.

First Amendment attorney Ted Boutrous told Stelter, “As far as I can tell, no sitting president has ever sued a reporter or media outlet or media executive for allegedly defaming him. When you have the presidential bully pulpit, you simply don’t need to sue to get to the truth.”

The Trump administration's game plan in recent weeks has been to downplay the Epstein story. That especially went into practice two weeks ago when Trump’s Department of Justice announced there was no so-called “client list,” that Epstein did die by suicide and that, essentially, there was nothing more to talk about.

Even many in the MAGA community, who had been told for years that there was something fishy with the Epstein story, clapped back at the Trump administration and called for answers — as well as Attorney General Pam Bondi’s job. When questioned by reporters, Trump played dumb, defended Bondi, and said things such as, “I don’t understand what the interest or what the fascination is.”

When that didn’t seem to work, he followed his usual blueprint of blaming Democrats, and then called Republicans who were upset “stupid” and “foolish” for listening to liberals.

Trump’s plan seemed to be to ignore, downplay and criticize Democrats until the story died down and was replaced by something else in the ever-changing political news cycle. It has been said that Trump believes news runs on a two-week cycle and all he had to do was wait this story out.

But this story has legs. And it especially blew up again when the Journal published its Friday story: “Jeffrey Epstein’s Friends Sent Him Bawdy Letters for a 50th Birthday Album. One Was From Donald Trump.” ([link removed])

That seemed to break Trump, who sued everybody associated with the Journal and the story: Dow Jones & Co. and its parent company, News Corp., as well as Murdoch, CEO Robert Thomson, and the two reporters who wrote the story.

The lawsuit, filed in South Florida, said, “Defendants concocted this story to malign President Trump’s character and integrity and deceptively portray him in a false light.”

And he is suing for $10 billion — an especially massive amount that is designed, in part, to scare all media outlets. As Stelter said on CNN ([link removed]) , “He’s trying to have a chilling effect on reporting more broadly. He’s trying to say to other news outlets, ‘Don’t come after me. Don’t report on me. Don’t look into my past. Or I’ll try to ruin you.”

That’s what’s really behind the lawsuit: It’s Trump saying, “Don’t mess with me.”

But the reporting and talking continue.

It should be noted that Trump is denying the Journal story, and the Journal is standing behind its story.

A MESSAGE FROM POYNTER
[link removed]


** Sarasota, Florida, event: Poynter’s 50th anniversary exhibit
------------------------------------------------------------

Step into the story of how journalism has changed and where it’s headed. Poynter’s "Moments of Truth: An Exploration of Journalism’s Past, Present, and Future" exhibit runs August 4–11 at The Ringling, featuring interactive displays and a free week of media literacy events. The week culminates in a thought-provoking community conversation with leaders in journalism and AI, examining how emerging technologies are reshaping the truth behind the images we see.

Register for the events ([link removed])


** What about the big picture?
------------------------------------------------------------

If Trump’s lawsuit was designed to scare people away from the Epstein story, it’s having the exact opposite effect.

At first, he tried to make it go away by downplaying it. When that didn’t happen, he got angry and sued. But that’s like dumping chum into the water. Now there’s a feeding frenzy from those who wonder why Trump is so determined to make this story go away.

So, where does this all go from here?

CNN’s Aaron Blake writes: “5 big questions about Trump’s ties to Epstein.” ([link removed]) Those questions include topics such as how close Epstein and Trump were; if Trump’s name actually appears in the so-called Epstein files; and what Trump knew about Epstein’s behavior.

And this all leads to what created the buzz in the first place: conspiracy theories. The New York Times’ Devlin Barrett gets into that in “What to Know About the Epstein Files, a Perfect Recipe for Conspiracy Theories.” ([link removed])

The Washington Post’s Natalie Allison points out ([link removed]) that this is hardly the first scandal in Trump’s orbit. Remember the “Access Hollywood” tape? And Stormy Daniels? Allison accurately notes that he was elected president after each of those scandals.

“But,” Allison wrote, “Epstein clearly has posed a problem for the White House. At minimum, it has been a distraction at a time when Trump wants to tout his legislative victories. If it continues to grab public attention, it could pose a more significant threat at a time when Trump’s standing with the public already has been on the decline, though polling shows him steady with his own party.”

Some polling, however, isn’t going his way. The Post’s Dan Balz writes, “Consumed by Epstein, Trump has lost ground on the economy and immigration.” ([link removed]) Balz wrote, “A year ago, voters saw Trump as a better steward of the economy than Vice President Kamala Harris. His tough talk on immigration appealed to many voters who saw the southern border as out of control and who blamed the Biden administration for the huge influx of undocumented migrants. Now he’s getting negative reviews on both.”


** To be fair …
------------------------------------------------------------

Fox News, which is also owned by Murdoch, hasn’t given the Trump-Epstein story much coverage. But it hasn’t totally ignored it. Howard Kurtz opened his Sunday “MediaBuzz” show talking about Trump’s lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal.

And Kurtz made the point that many others have, saying, “By accusing the newspaper of libel in a filing in Miami, the president has drawn extra attention to the Journal’s reporting.”

Kurtz also echoed another popular point: This story isn’t going away.


** Resisting the temptation
------------------------------------------------------------

Semafor’s Ben Smith writes about the Epstein story in his latest column: “How to resist the Epstein temptation.” ([link removed])

Smith writes, “The Jeffrey Epstein story brings out two of the worst traits in journalists and — to really point fingers here — in our audiences. First, the human tendency to fill in gaps with wild theories that flatter our prejudices; second, the bias toward what’s new over what’s known.”

There’s much more, of course, so check out his thoughtful thoughts.


** Colbert fallout
------------------------------------------------------------
New York City’s Ed Sullivan Theater, where “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” is filmed. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)

The media world is still buzzing about the surprising, but not stunning, decision by CBS to cancel “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” The show will end next May and will not be replaced. The announcement came just days after Colbert slammed Paramount, the owners of CBS, for settling its lawsuit with Trump, calling it a “big, fat bribe.”

So the question now is: Did CBS cancel the show because of politics, or did they cancel it because late-night talk shows just don’t make sense financially anymore?

Maybe the answer is a little of both.

There’s no question that the timing of the announcement is curious. Not only did it come days after Colbert’s criticism, but Paramount is still in the midst of being sold to Skydance — a transaction that still needs approval from Trump’s Federal Communications Commission.

In a Substack column ([link removed]) , NPR TV critic Eric Deggans wrote, “Why announce the May cancellation right now – when Colbert has 10 months to lambaste the network and use his current show to position himself for a post-CBS future? Why not try to work out a way to do the show cheaper? Or at least figure how to keep Colbert from going to a competing media company after The Late Show ends? CBS has spent 10 years building up Colbert as the comedy face of its network – walking away from that in the space of a few days seems short sighted and unnecessarily abrupt.”

He added, “Unless, of course, Paramount is also trying to appease the Trump administration to get much-needed federal approvals for its sale to Skydance Media.”

CBS insists that the decision was purely financial. There are reports that seem to back up that claim.

The New York Times’ John Koblin reported ([link removed]) , “‘The Late Show,’ a fixture of the network for over three decades, was racking up losses of tens of millions of dollars a year, and the gap was growing fast, according to two people familiar with the show’s finances. Like other late-night shows before it, ‘The Late Show’ was canceled when the network could not figure how to make the finances work in an entertainment world increasingly dominated by streaming.”

Koblin added, “The cancellation underscores just how rapidly the late-night genre has fallen. Not even ‘The Late Show,’ the highest rated of those network talk shows, was safe, as many in the entertainment industry assumed it was.”

CNN’s Brian Stelter wrote ([link removed]) , “CBS insiders insist, even when speaking frankly on condition of anonymity, that the move was financially driven, not politically motivated.”

But, he added, “Many observers have huge doubts about that, given that Colbert has been an outspoken critic of President Trump.”

Whether it was financial or not, the timing did seem troubling. Deggans wrote, “There are lots of sound financial reasons why media owners might want to walk away from late night TV shows in general — viewership is down and ad revenues are shrinking as audiences turn from traditional broadcast and cable to streaming services. But shuttering late night shows at a time when such decisions look like suppressing important speech will bring long lasting damage. And it also throws away a genre which has fed a huge chunk of the American comedy system.”

The Washington Post’s Emily Yahr and Geoff Edgers reported ([link removed]) that the White House did not pressure Paramount to get rid of Colbert. “It was a pleasant surprise,” a White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told the Post.

Of course, that didn’t stop Trump from celebrating. He posted on Truth Social ([link removed]) , “I absolutely love that Colbert got fired. His talent was even less than his ratings. I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next. Has even less talent than Colbert! Greg Gutfeld is better than all of them combined, including the Moron on NBC who ruined the once great Tonight Show.”

Did Trump directly or indirectly get Colbert fired? The answer might not even matter. Just the appearance that politics played a role in Colbert’s cancellation is troubling. And you hope this doesn’t now deter other late-night hosts and various satirical columnists and commentators from toning down their sharp criticisms of those in power.

As Deggans wrote, “At this moment, I think it’s important for audiences which care about this kind of commentary to keep supporting the satirists, columnists and pundits who create this work – even when those people are stuck working for leaders and companies not taking similar stands. Sad as I am to see Colbert lose his platform, I’m eager to see what he does next. And hope his fans don’t lose hope and choose to follow him wherever his creative spirit takes him next. Because in a time of political turmoil, it is the satirists and ethical columnists who can help people process what’s happening and decide how they really feel.”


** What’s next?
------------------------------------------------------------

So, what is next for Colbert?

Well, for starters, his show is still on for another 10 months, which gives him 10 months to continue to take jabs at not only Trump, but the folks that own CBS.

After that? Well, there is life after being a late-night host, as David Letterman and Conan O’Brien have shown. Letterman, who left late-night on his own terms, has a talk show on Netflix. O’Brien has a popular podcast.

As The New York Times’ Jason Zinoman pointed out ([link removed]) , O’Brien became a “folk hero” after NBC took away his time slot. Colbert could end up riding a similar wave of a well-respected host who had his show taken away because of both corporate and actual politics.


** Look over there
------------------------------------------------------------

As the Epstein stories continue to swirl around Trump, it’s no surprise that he has thrown a distraction or two out there. You know, a story or two to get people talking about something else.

Perhaps that was his reasoning for writing a Truth Social post ([link removed]) saying the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians should change back to their previous nicknames. Those nicknames — the Washington Redskins and Cleveland Indians — were changed because many found them offensive.

He later had another post threatening the Commanders, saying, “I won’t make a deal for them to build a stadium in Washington. The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be exciting for everyone.” He also wrote about Guardians owner “Matt Dolan, who is very political, has lost three Elections in a row because of that ridiculous name change.”

Matt Dolan’s brother, Paul, is the main owner and CEO of the Guardians. Matt owns a partial stake. He ran for the U.S. Senate in Ohio in 2022 and 2024, but lost in the Republican primaries.

When asked Sunday about Trump’s posts, Cleveland Guardians president Chris Antonetti said, “Not something I’m tracking or paying a lot of attention to, but I would say generally, I understand there are very different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago. But it’s a decision we made and we’ve gotten the opportunity to build the brand as the Guardians over the last four years and we’re excited about the future that’s in front of us.”

In other words, they aren’t changing their names because Trump said so. The Commanders have not responded, but Josh Harris, the managing partner of the group that bought the Commanders in 2023, has said the team would never go back to its old nickname.


** Media tidbits
------------------------------------------------------------
* A federal judge has dismissed Trump’s lawsuit against legendary journalist Bob Woodward for publishing interviews during his first administration in the 2022 audiobook called “The Trump Tapes.” The Washington Post’s Brianna Tucker has more ([link removed]) .
* More late-night talk. Mediaite’s Zachary Leeman with “Jon Stewart Revealed Uncertainty About Daily Show’s Future Just Hours Before Parent Company Axed Colbert.” ([link removed])
* The Los Angeles Times’ Samantha Masunaga with “Former CBS and Disney TV executive James Stark Bennett dies at 78.” ([link removed])
* The Athletic’s Richard Deitsch with “The World Series On Netflix, Apple TV+, YouTube or Amazon Prime Video? That’s the future.” ([link removed])


** Hot type
------------------------------------------------------------
* The Washington Post’s Ariana Eunjung Cha, Jahi Chikwendiu, Drea Cornejo and Dan Keating with “He broadcast his young cancer journey. His last message: ‘Life was awesome.’” ([link removed])
* Catching up on this story from a couple of weeks ago. The New York Times’ Benjamin Weiser with “How a Single Overdose Unraveled an Empire of Heroin.” ([link removed])


** More resources for journalists
------------------------------------------------------------
* Refine your immigration policy expertise with Poynter's Beat Academy. Enroll now ([link removed]) .
* Journalism leaders of color: Poynter’s prestigious Diversity Leadership Academy has helped over 200 journalists of color advance their careers. Apply today ([link removed]) .
* Learn how to “lead your leaders” in this virtual intensive for journalism managers handling big responsibilities without direct reports. Apply today ([link removed]) .
* Early-career editors: Line-edit under pressure, coach inexperienced reporters remotely and guide reporters to develop stories that elevate their beat coverage. Register now ([link removed]) .
* Join a five-day, in-person workshop that gives new managers the skills they need to help forge successful paths to leadership in journalism, media and technology. Apply today ([link removed]) .

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) .

The Poynter Report is your daily dive into the world of media, packed with the latest news and insights. Get it delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday by signing up here ([link removed]) . And don’t forget to tune into our biweekly podcast ([link removed]) for even more.
[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]) .