The media has made Donald Trump look more coherent than he is. It’s called ‘sanewashing’

Donald Trump gave a speech on September 5, 2024, outlining his economic plans for the United States. During the event, he was asked what steps he would take, if elected president, to make childcare more affordable. Trump responded with a 374-word statement that was largely incoherent, disjointed, and devoid of meaningful policy detail. His remarks included references to former senator Marco Rubio, his daughter Ivanka, and vague assertions about taxing foreign nations, all without addressing the core question about childcare affordability. This response demonstrated a lack of preparation and coherence, suggesting that the topic had not been seriously considered. Despite the chaotic nature of Trump's answer, subsequent news coverage largely ignored the disarray and instead highlighted the scripted portions of his speech. For instance, The New York Times published an article titled “Trump calls for an efficiency commission, an idea pushed by Elon Musk,” which barely acknowledged the incoherence of his response. The mention of his “jumbled and meandering answer” appeared only in the 24th paragraph, indicating a minimal effort to contextualize the broader implications of his remarks. This pattern of selective reporting has led to the emergence of the term “sanewashing,” which describes how journalists, particularly when covering Trump, tend to emphasize the coherent and seemingly rational parts of his statements while overlooking the erratic, incoherent, or bizarre elements. This practice can create a misleading impression of Trump’s competence and stability, potentially obscuring his more controversial or extreme views. The term has gained traction among critics who argue that such reporting contributes to an incomplete or distorted understanding of the candidate. The concept of sanewashing takes on added significance in light of the 2024 presidential election. During the campaign, Joe Biden faced intense scrutiny over his declining physical and mental health, leading to his withdrawal from the race in August 2024. Many observers believed Trump was similarly unfit for office, yet his image remained relatively stable in public perception. This discrepancy has fueled speculation that journalistic practices, including sanewashing, played a role in shaping voter opinions. In an attempt to better understand the extent of sanewashing, researchers conducted an analysis of two notable instances: the childcare speech and a controversial remark Trump made at a rally in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, referencing Arnold Palmer. By examining the texts of these speeches alongside hundreds of news articles that covered them, the study aimed to determine whether journalists systematically prioritized certain aspects of Trump’s messaging over others. The findings suggest that there is some evidence supporting the occurrence of sanewashing. Reporters generally focused on one or two key points from Trump’s speeches, often omitting or downplaying the more confusing or provocative parts. This approach may contribute to a narrative that frames Trump as more rational and composed than he actually appears, thereby influencing public perception in ways that could affect electoral outcomes. As the 2024 election drew closer, the debate over journalistic responsibility intensified. Critics argued that by sanitizing Trump’s rhetoric, media outlets risked enabling his candidacy by presenting him as a viable, if unconventional, leader. Meanwhile, defenders of the media emphasized the need to highlight policy proposals rather than dwell on tangential or absurd comments. The tension between these perspectives underscores the complex role of journalism in political discourse.