Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the race for the White House indicates, much more than rankings and various reports, the state of health of journalism in Italy and around the world.
Since the President of the United States began to show signs of physical and mental decline, rumors have long been circulating about his possible retirement in view of a second term, already shaky in itself. But the press close to and accredited to the White House – all without exception – has done nothing but deny the rumor, reporting with conviction that it was a wishful thinkingdepending on the point of view, and not of a real possibility.
And to reinforce this denial, almost all the newspapers cited the sources, official and unofficial, closest to the president and the official ones of the White House. “It is impossible that Biden will give up.” “This is pure science fiction.”
Despite themselves, without wanting to attribute the blame to him, the most accredited journalists in Washington repeated the message in unison: “It is absolutely out of the question for the president to step down.”
Thus, two narratives were quickly created: the first, the official one, propagated by the White House, which attempted to patch up a hole that had now become a crater; the second, the unofficial one, which appeared in newspapers mostly through the individual opinions of some editorialists, ran under the radar and on social media, highlighting how a large portion of the American electorate, moderate and progressive, distrusted both Trump and, at the same time, a head of state capable of collecting multiple gaffes and who went so far as to mistake Zelensky for Putin.
In this chasing of rumors and denials, between official and unofficial versions, not even the reasons of those Democrats – not least former President Barack Obama and former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi – who suggested that Biden’s campaign should end as soon as possible so as not to further prolong the suffering of a man (and a party) who would hardly be confirmed for a second term – were decisive (at least initially).
The unofficial narrative (Democratic veterans and popular consensus) had clearly indicated the path to follow for a long time: a direction that was then taken, albeit with the aggravating factor of having wasted precious time.
The official narrative of the White House, stubborn and contrary to a change of pace that should have come much earlier, reveals how a part of the press, in particular those that follow the president closely, is increasingly house-organ of power. Incapable of cultivating doubt even in the face of official positions, however obvious, and unknowingly contributing to the political suicide of a party.
It is no coincidence that today, in day after There is much talk of Biden’s surrender as “selflessness”, understood as the praise of an altruistic politician capable of giving up his pride (or his seat) for the good of the party and the country.
But it is, once again, the guilt-ridden response of a press incapable of admitting that it made the mistake of flirting too long with the official White House narrative. Also because if Biden had really wanted to give up all this, he should have done so months earlier, not when the game was almost over.
In 24 days, however, the most powerful man in the world did everything on his own, and with him his closest collaborators, making his hopes of being re-elected vain: the disastrous debate with Trump at the end of June, the recurring use of the teleprompter to speak to the public (with the consequence that many donors began to doubt his lucidity), shaky health, the limping interview on July 5 on ABC News, and finally Covid.
Trump’s attempted assassination also weakened Biden: the former appeared to voters as someone who survived an extremist’s bullet, the latter as someone who was incapable of submitting to a reporter’s questions.
On July 19, 48 hours after the dramatic announcement, his team was calling the shots and still banging out the news: “Biden will run and win the election against Trump.” Normal political grammar for the communications team of a leader trying to buy time; a terrible dissonance for a press that should be doing the opposite.
