I don't do outrage porn

Mountains vs molehills

(Photo via Unsplash)

Donald Trump has been president for 8 days.

In that time, the following “outrages” have happened:

• He wants to renamed the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America”

• He wants to buy Greenland (or possibly take it over by force)

• He wants a better deal on the Panama Canal (or possibly take it over by force)

• He put his billionaire supporters (Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg) in the front row at his inauguration

• Elon Musk made a hand/arm gesture that evoked the “Heil Hitler” salute

• Trump reacted poorly when a bishop at an inauguration event asked him to “have mercy” on LGBTQ people and immigrants.

There are more. But you get the idea.

As you may have noticed, I didn’t write much — if anything — about any of these outrages. That was on purpose.

Here’s some real talk: In the decade since Trump came down the golden escalator, a cottage industry has developed: Outrage porn.

What is outrage porn and who does it? It’s anything that is designed to make you angry. To piss you off. The purveyors? Mostly writers and pundit types who have made a very good living by being shocked, appalled, angry and, yes, outraged by every little thing Trump has done.

I won’t name these people. I don’t need to. You know who they are.

Candidly, it’s exhausting. And, from a political standpoint, it’s proven to be almost entirely ineffective. If expressing your outrage at everything Trump says or does (or threatens to do) worked, would he be back in the White House with majorities in the House and Senate? Uh, no.

Democratic politicians — at least in the party’s leadership and many of those angling to be in the 2028 mix — have figured this out.

This, from a recent Politico story, is instructive on that front:

This week provided some clues about an emerging approach that’s coming to define Democrats at the outset of Trump’s second administration, firmly breaking with its fury-fueled resistance roots of 2017. Instead, Democratic state and congressional leaders are primarily looking for openings to attack the president, while promising bipartisanship and trying to model a Democratic alternative in the states.

In interviews with more than a dozen Democratic elected officials and strategists, they explained the shift as evidence of a party reorienting itself after sweeping losses and biding its time until public sentiment potentially turns against Trump. That’s because they are in less friendly territory than in 2017. Trump won the popular vote and all 50 states shifted right in 2024. Thirteen House Democrats are now sitting in districts Trump won last November, but another 50 represent seats that Kamala Harris won by 9 points or less. Just a few thousand showed up to protest Trump’s inauguration…

…But for many of the future leaders and possible 2028 Democratic primary contenders, Trump’s pardons and Musk’s gesture — moments that would have inspired public outcry eight years ago — did not draw an immediate public response. Former Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz did not weigh in with statements or on social media. Nor did Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro did address Trump’s pardons when asked by local reporters. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker was a notable outlier, posting on X that Musk’s salute was “outrageous” and criticizing Trump for his pardons.

And there’s this from a Washington Post story on Monday:

Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) argued during the caucus’s weekly meeting Wednesday that Democrats cannot chase every outrage, especially since the Trump administration will purposely “flood the zone” with maddening changes, according to people in the room, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak freely about an off-the-record meeting. He argued that Democrats must remain united in their messaging and disciplined in holding House Republicans accountable on key issues — particularly cost-of-living issues, border security and community safety — warning that if they don’t, their message will not sink in with the American people.

And yet, a quick search of political content on YouTube or Substack or, say, BlueSky reveals plenty of content creators from the left and/or the “Never Trump” movement engaging in the exact same sort of outrage porn that typified how they approached Trump’s first four years in office.

The reason why is simple. It works. No, maybe not from a strategic point of view. But from a money point of view.

Outrage (or anger) is a VERY powerful human emotion. It makes us FEEL deeply. It impels us to action. (No one knows this better than Donald Trump.)

It follows then that if you are looking for ways to get people to subscribe to whatever you are doing, one of the best ways to make it happen is to get them mad. To make them feel as though the end is nigh.

Which is what lots and lots of content creators have spent the last decade doing with Trump. Insisting that EVERY action he takes (and even many he doesn’t take) must be opposed with full force — and the only way to do that is to give to this person or that website.

Here’s the problem: One of the most important roles as journalist or a content creator can play in politics these days is to distinguish between mountains and molehills.

But, if everything is a mountain, there are no molehills. And the mountains become less and less meaningful.

To me, there have been a few mountains in the first 8 days of Trump’s presidency: His decision to issue blanket pardons and commutations for everyone charged on January 6 and his attempt to end birthright citizenship.

Those are HUGE deals — especially the January 6 pardons. (I am very skeptical the birthright citizenship thing ends up ever going into effect since it appears to run directly counter to the 14th Amendment.)

Trump’s pardoning violent criminals — some of whom beat up cops — because a) it fits his preferred narrative of January 6 and b) he couldn’t be bothered to go through the cases one-by-one is appalling. And it’s a decision that will echo long after Trump leaves the White House.

If you spend all of your time getting outraged at the “Gulf of America,” you miss — or fail to fully grasp — the danger the January 6 pardons represent. Which is, of course, part of Trump’s long-held strategic imperative to flood the zone, making it very tough to know where to look and why.

I think it’s imperative for every single news consumer to grasp the difference between molehills and mountains. And to recognize there is an entire content world dedicated solely to pissing you off and making you angry so that you reach into your wallet (do people even have wallets anymore?) and donate or subscribe or whatever.

That’s not me. I don’t do outrage porn. My goal is and always will be to make sure you know what really moves the needle in the world of politics.

When something is truly outrageous or beyond the bounds of acceptable conduct, I will absolutely call it out — like I did with the whole Nancy Mace crapola.

But I will never try to make you angry because I know it makes you more likely to a) like me or b) give me your money. Because that’s not what I am selling. I am not in the outrage porn business.

When I tell you something really is a mountain, it’s because my decades of experience covering, studying and reporting about politics have informed that view. It’s not to sell you something.

I don’t for performance art. I do authentic, independent, transparent journalism. And I really hope you will consider supporting me in that effort.