The Reporter Who Didn’t Smile
At the White House correspondents’ dinner, one journalist offered a quiet lesson in independence.
When journalism awards were announced at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner on Friday, one of the winners was the Wall Street Journal for an investigation of President Trump’s association with disgraced financier and pedophile Jeffrey Epstein — reporting which led the president to file a $20-billion lawsuit against the newspaper. When CNN’s Wolf Blitzer mentioned the lawsuit while announcing the award, Trump mugged for the cameras as he sat on the dais.
The most revealing moment came as Trump stood to congratulate the WSJ reporters who wrote the winning entry. Khadeeja Saftar was first in line. Trump’s lawsuit had disclosed her address, forcing her family to relocate. She mouthed “thank you,” but did not smile or speak as she shook Trump’s hand. He threw up his hands in an exaggerated, palms-up shrug, expressing mock bewilderment at the reporter’s chilly reception. The crowd roared.
By contrast, the five WSJ journalists who followed — all talented reporters — smiled broadly and, in some cases, engaged in chitchat with Trump. As I watched this scene over and over in a clip posted on social media, I wondered — what would I have done? Proximity to power can make one’s standards sag.
Proximity to power has always been the core problem of the WHCA dinner. I attended once, in 1994, a few weeks after I first arrived in Washington as a correspondent for Newsday. I was disturbed by the idea of mingling with government and Hollywood figures with whom the press should always maintain a skeptical, arm’s-length relationship, and swore I would never attend again. To the annoyance of my bosses, I held to that standard even after becoming White House correspondent. Eventually, some news organizations, including The New York Times, came to the same conclusion.
At past WHCA dinners, which raises money for scholarships, the president traditionally made brief remarks, usually with a humorous or self-deprecating tone. Trump refused to attend during his first term, but accepted the invitation this year. The reward for the assembled journalists was a rambling, vitriolic one-hour spiel in which he attacked and belittled the media, name-checking many reporters — including one who had just greeted him with a smile. Trump remarked, “He’s been killing me for years. And yet tonight, he shakes my hand. He hugs me. Everything nice.”
Most of the audience, except for Trump aides, sat in silence. As far as I know, no one walked out in protest.
None of it should have been a surprise. Since taking office a second time, Trump has methodically attacked news organizations. He’s filed lawsuits that were often frivolous — and some media companies have settled them, paying him millions of dollars to avoid the hassle of tangling with the president. One of his allies took over CBS, tarnishing the network’s crown jewel, 60 Minutes. The program had remained a huge success, but Trump’s relationship with it had long been contentious. Key producers and correspondents were forced out or quit under the new regime.
Meanwhile, Trump regularly insulted or belittled individual reporters — by my count, 48 times between his return to office and Friday’s speech.
Trump’s appearance at this year’s dinner was an example of the insidious way he bends institutions to his will. Given Trump’s antagonistic attitude toward the media, which he often labeled “the enemy of the people,” there was no reason to ever invite him. Of course, as a matter of courtesy, the president is always invited. Trump had skipped four dinners in his first term and the first one in his second term, so organizers likely thought he would once again refuse to appear.
Trump had set the trap. This time, he accepted — and the WHCA was stuck. It would have been a bigger story if the WHCA had disinvited him, and would have fed into the president’s narrative that the media has Trump Derangement Syndrome.
After a gunman interrupted the original April dinner before Trump had a chance to speak, the WHCA had an out. Trump at the time complained that he had planned a “vicious” speech and was disappointed not to be able to deliver it. So he had telegraphed his intended tone. The WHCA could easily have announced that, in the interest of caution, the dinner would be limited to just reporters and no president or administration officials.
But instead, organizers invited the president yet again. In a ballroom devoted to honoring the First Amendment, the clearest display of journalistic independence came from Khadeeja Saftar, who did not smile.
Glenn, well said. I attended the WHCA dinner once years back when I was at Newsday, and I saw clearly that it wasn't for me. I’ve been invited since, but I haven't gone.
This, though, is of a different order. This president, as we all know, reviles journalism and cares nothing that reporters have been killed in action—take the case of Jamal Khashoggi, or the 129 members of the press killed in the line of duty in 2025, according to the Committee to Protect Journalism. What was expected of his speech? Exactly what was delivered.
It’s all well and good that the WHCA provides scholarships, but inviting this president delegitimizes the organization itself. Those WSJ reporters, and all others who call themselves journalists, should have boycotted—smile or no smile. It is confounding and otherworldly to imagine them writing what they wrote, only to share a stage and shake hands with that man.
Fine analysis. I, too, once attended a WHCA dinner as an LA Times reporter but never again. In found it entertaining but ultimately off-putting. This time was appalling. WHCA need to reconsider its leadership.