Trump phoned in to the network on Sunday to discuss the death of Senator Lindsey Graham. During the call, he made the comment without apparent hesitation.
“We’re trying to have CNN go on a normal path, and we’ll do that,” Trump said while speaking with anchor Jake Tapper.
Rather than challenge the statement, Tapper accepted it and thanked the president. “Well, I’m on a normal path right here, sir, and I appreciate your time. And thank you for calling in,” Tapper replied. Trump had declined to answer questions on subjects beyond Graham’s passing, including recent U.S. strikes on Iran, and Tapper did not press further. The anchor closed the segment by saying, “we would love to have you back sometime.”
Social media erupted with criticism. Viewers called Tapper an “enabler” and a “sycophant.” One commenter noted that it is not the president’s role “to direct the ‘path’ any news organization follows,” and suggested that if CNN accepts this premise, it should “close their doors, or officially merge with Fox.” Another observer summarized the moment plainly: “Admitting they are trying to control the media.”
The timing amplified concerns about the statement’s implications. The Justice Department recently approved Paramount Skydance’s acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, CNN’s parent company. A merger of that scale requires favorable regulatory treatment from the current administration, creating a potential leverage point. When a president discusses placing a network on a “normal path” while holding sway over its corporate owners, analysts said, it reads as something more deliberate than a casual remark.
The contrast with Tapper’s own prior statements underscored the moment’s significance. Just months earlier, Tapper declared on air that CNN’s mission “is not to try and please the president or only report the statements he likes.” On Sunday, viewers watched the anchor appear to do exactly that.
The episode raised fundamental questions about media independence and the relationship between the presidency and news organizations in the current environment. Press advocates emphasized that American news outlets answer to the public, not to the sitting president, regardless of corporate ownership structures or regulatory pressures.
