{"id":267218,"date":"2025-11-02T16:54:11","date_gmt":"2025-11-02T16:54:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/267218\/"},"modified":"2025-11-02T16:54:11","modified_gmt":"2025-11-02T16:54:11","slug":"east-wing-ballroom-donations-by-corporate-owners-create-awkward-moments-for-news-outlets","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/267218\/","title":{"rendered":"East Wing ballroom donations by corporate owners create awkward moments for news outlets"},"content":{"rendered":"

President Donald Trump\u2019s razing of the White House\u2019s East Wing<\/a> to build a ballroom has put some news organizations following the story in an awkward position, with corporate owners among the contributors to the project \u2014 and their reporters covering it vigorously. <\/p>\n

Comcast, which owns NBC News and MSNBC, has faced on-air criticism from some of the liberal cable channel\u2019s personalities for its donation. Amazon, whose founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post, is another donor. The newspaper editorialized in favor<\/a> of Trump\u2019s project, pointing out the Bezos connection a day later after critics noted its omission.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not the first time since Trump regained the presidency that interests of journalists at outlets that are a small part of a corporate titan\u2019s portfolio have clashed with owners. Both the Walt Disney Co<\/a>. and Paramount<\/a> have settled lawsuits with Trump rather than defend ABC News and CBS News in court.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is Trump\u2019s Washington,\u201d said Chuck Todd, former NBC \u201cMeet the Press\u201d host. \u201cNone of this helps the reputations of the news organizations that these companies own, because it compromises everybody.\u201d<\/p>\n

Companies haven\u2019t said how much they donated, or why<\/p>\n

None of the individuals and corporations identified by the White House as donors<\/a> has publicly said how much was given, although a $22 million Google donation was revealed in a court filing. Comcast would not say Friday why it gave, although some MSNBC commentators have sought to fill in the blanks.<\/p>\n

MSNBC\u2019s Stephanie Ruhle said the donations should be a concern to Americans, \u201cbecause there ain\u2019t no company out there writing a check just for good will.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThose public-facing companies should know that there\u2019s a cost in terms of their reputations with the American people,\u201d Rachel Maddow said on her show this week, specifically citing Comcast. \u201cThere may be a cost to their bottom line when they do things against American values, against the public interest because they want to please Trump or buy him off or profit somehow from his authoritarian overthrow of our democracy.\u201d<\/p>\n

NBC\u2019s \u201cNightly News\u201d led its Oct. 22 broadcast with a story on the East Wing demolition, which reporter Gabe Gutierrez said was paid for by private donors, \u201camong them Comcast, NBC\u2019s parent company.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cNightly News\u201d spent a total of five minutes on the story that week, half the time of ABC\u2019s \u201cWorld News Tonight,\u201d though NBC pre-empted its Tuesday newscast for NBA coverage, said Andrew Tyndall, head of ADT Research. There\u2019s no evidence that Comcast tried to influence NBC\u2019s coverage in any way; Todd said the corporation\u2019s leaders have no history of doing that. A Comcast spokeswoman had no comment.<\/p>\n

Todd spoke out<\/a> against his bosses at NBC News in the past, but said he doubted he would have done so in this case, in part because Comcast hasn\u2019t said why the contribution was made. \u201cYou could make the defense that it is contributing to the United States\u201d by renovating the White House, he said.<\/p>\n

More troubling, he said, is the perception that Comcast CEO Brian Roberts had to do it to curry favor with the Trump administration. Trump, in a Truth Social post in April, called Comcast and Roberts \u201ca disgrace to the integrity of Broadcasting!!!\u201d The president cited the company\u2019s ownership of MSNBC and NBC News.<\/p>\n

Roberts may need their help. Stories this week suggested Comcast might be interested<\/a> in buying all or part of Warner Bros. Discovery, a deal that would require government approval.<\/p>\n

White House cannot be \u2018a museum to the past\u2019<\/p>\n

The Post\u2019s editorial last weekend was eye-opening, even for a section that has taken a conservative turn following Bezos\u2019 direction<\/a> that it concentrate on defending personal liberties and the free market. The Oct. 25 editorial was unsigned, which indicates that it is the newspaper\u2019s official position, and was titled \u201cIn Defense of the White House ballroom.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Post said the ballroom is a necessary addition and although Trump is pursuing it \u201cin the most jarring manner possible,\u201d it would not have gotten done in his term if he went through a traditional approval process.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe White House cannot simply be a museum to the past,\u201d the Post wrote. \u201cLike America, it must evolve with the times to maintain its greatness. Strong leaders reject calcification. In that way, Trump\u2019s undertaking is a shot across the bow at NIMBYs everywhere.\u201d<\/p>\n

In sharing a copy of the editorial on social media, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote that it was the \u201cfirst dose of common sense I\u2019ve seen from the legacy media on this story.\u201d<\/p>\n

The New York Times, by contrast, has not taken an editorial stand either for or against the project. It has run a handful of opinion columns: Ross Douthat called Trump\u2019s move necessary considering potential red tape, while Maureen Dowd said it was an \u201cunsanctioned, ahistoric, abominable destruction of the East Wing.\u201d<\/p>\n

In a social media post later Saturday, Columbia University journalism professor Bill Grueskin noted the absence of any mention of Bezos in the Post editorial\u201d and said he wrote to a Post spokeswoman about it. In a \u201cstealth edit\u201d<\/a> that Grueskin said didn\u2019t include any explanation, a paragraph was added the next day about the private donors, including Amazon. \u201cAmazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Post,\u201d the newspaper said.<\/p>\n

The Post had no comment on the issue, spokeswoman Olivia Petersen said on Sunday.<\/p>\n

In a story this past week, NPR reported<\/a> that the ballroom editorial was one of three that the Post had written in the previous two weeks on a matter in which Bezos had a financial or corporate interest without noting his personal stakes.<\/p>\n

In a public appearance<\/a> last December, Bezos acknowledged that he was a \u201cterrible owner\u201d for the Post from the point of view of appearances of conflict. \u201cA pure newspaper owner who only owned a newspaper and did nothing else would probably be, from that point of view, a much better owner,\u201d the Amazon founder said.<\/p>\n

Grueskin, in an interview, said Bezos had every right as an owner to influence the Post\u2019s editorial policy. But he said it was important for readers to know his involvement in the East Wing story. They may reject the editorial because of the conflict, he said, or conclude that \u201cthe editorial is so well-argued, I put a lot of credibility into what I just read.\u201d<\/p>\n

___<\/p>\n

David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at http:\/\/x.com\/dbauder<\/a> and https:\/\/bsky.app\/profile\/dbauder.bsky.social<\/a><\/p>\n