The book "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House" [File photo] 

If you've been following the American news cycle at all during the past week, you've no doubt heard about Michael Wolff's "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House," which covers, as the title suggests, Donald Trump's time as president as well as his ascension to the office. The book – whose original publication date of Jan. 9 was pushed forward to Jan. 5 because of "unprecedented demand" – has stirred up huge amounts of controversy for its portrayal of Trump as an impulsive and incompetent leader surrounded by an inner circle that has little faith in his judgment.

The president, as would be expected, has had strong reactions to the book both leading up to and following its publication, including the threat of a libel lawsuit as well as a series of indignant tweets.

"I authorized Zero access to White House (actually turned him down many times) for author of phony book! I never spoke to him for book!" Trump said on Twitter late Thursday night. "Full of lies, misrepresentations and sources that don't exist. Look at this guy's past and watch what happens to him and Sloppy Steve!"

Labeling the book "phony" or "full of lies" and attacking the credibility of Michael Wolff have thus far been the preferred tactics used to respond to "Fire and Fury," not only by Trump but by the rest of his administration as well. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders has said, "This is a guy who made up a lot of stories to try to sell books, and I think more and more people are starting to see that his facts just simply don't add up." During a recent interview with CNN, White House senior policy advisor Stephen Miller characterized the book and the quotes therein as "tragic," "grotesque," and "a pile of trash" – all while repeatedly praising Donald Trump as a "political genius."

These attacks, however, have only served to garner more attention for the book. On Amazon, it was the number one bestseller before it was even released, and had already racked up more than a thousand customer comments only two days after publication. It has also dominated the left-leaning news cycle since the beginning of January. Indeed, if one's media intake were restricted to CNN, it would be easy to think that the book's release was currently the only event of significance in the world.

So, it's undeniable that "Fire and Fury" has caused an uproar – but is there any meaning behind all this noise? And does it really change anything?

I admit that I haven't read the book, but based on everything that's been written about it so far I can't see any point in doing so. According to reviewers, Trump comes off as bumbling, amateurish and perhaps even mentally unstable, among a host of other unflattering traits. But anyone who's seen more than 10 minutes of Trump speaking in public already knew that. "Fire and Fury" might provide more grounds to believe Trump is drastically unqualified to serve as president, but I already have a new reason to think that every time I read one of his tweets. 

People on the left will read the book and feel vindicated in their hatred for Trump, while people on the right will dismiss it as biased and "full of lies." It may have been exciting for CNN to drum up the controversy around the book, but ultimately no one's opinion on Trump will be changed.

There is, however, one particular quote that the media has highlighted from "Fire and Fury" as a potential game-changer: the characterization by Steve Bannon, or "Sloppy Steve," of a meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and Russian officials during the presidential campaign as "treasonous." The left has claimed that this somehow supports the case for Trump's alleged collusion with Russia.

This is both ridiculous and hypocritical. Before Bannon's fallout with Trump, no one on the left would have cared what his thoughts were on anything – in fact, they would probably have been delighted if his opinion were the opposite of their own. So why is it that Bannon's judgment can now be used as evidence against Trump?

In 2018, the left would do best to remember that to win allies, it must work to actually change people's minds without sacrificing consistency in its own beliefs.

Kyle Burnaby is a journalist from Cheyenne, Wyoming. He now lives in Bangkok.

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.

Related

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)