Since his inauguration on Jan. 20, President Donald J. Trump has called many of the leading press and media organizations in this country peddlers of what he deems “fake news.” In a variety of tweets, press conferences and interviews, Mr. Trump has made it abundantly clear that news outlets the American people have relied upon for years, including ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and the New York Times, are, in his eyes, unworthy of their trust. 

This accusation, while generally groundless, has gained an alarming amount of traction in the last couple of weeks with the general public, as evidenced in a recent Emerson College Poll. Members of the public who still trust in these organizations are often left wondering how a majority of the U.S. population could be found to distrust them. The answer may actually be surprisingly similar to accusations of psychopathy in everyday people.

Trump declaring media as peddlers of “fake news” is much like an average person being accused of being a psychopath. Although a trained eye, or maybe a dedicated fact-checker, could likely see the falsehood, the average person, who has to spend a substantial amount of time at work or chasing the kids, would be left to trust the accuser, especially if that accuser holds the highest public office in the land.

This is due to the fact that a psychopath, while lacking many of the things that we consider essential parts of humanity, including guilt, empathy, compassion and love, still maintains a convincing façade. A psychopath, by definition, is naturally good at blending into society and appearing for all intents and purposes to be a normal everyday person. Therefore, it is incredibly hard to argue that you are not a psychopath, because you cannot argue normalcy as evidence against the accusation.

In the same way, by declaring the stories of the New York Times or CNN to be “fake,” Trump undermines their ability to argue otherwise. Once your stories have been called fake, any story you publish arguing otherwise can be similarly discredited by simply saying that it is also “fake.” Our only option at that point is to fact-check every story published or broadcast to verify even the smallest details, something many everyday Americans simply don’t have the time to do.

By creating this sort of circular argument and pushing it to the masses, Mr. Trump has started a dangerous and potentially lasting cycle of undermining American trust and values. The media, be it in print or on TV, has long been the first to give voice to prominent social issues, from civil rights to the violation of public trust by elected officials. 

Built upon generations of muckraking and coverage of our nation’s most important events, the reputation of these organizations has been earned with hard work, dedication and belief in freedom of the press. However, as many people know, trust is hard won and easily lost. 

Once someone like Trump starts to attack the foundations of that trust, the cracks quickly expand. These cracks are only spread further by the public turning to news sources that are less subject to mainstream criticism who find it easier to get away with unverified or unsubstantiated reporting.

Once this process is taken into account, it is easy to see how so many people could lose trust in the media so quickly, although Gallup polls would indicate that this trend started earlier than some may recognize. It is also easy to see how counterproductive to Mr. Trump’s own goals this type of accusation is.

At some point, the president of the United States will need to rely on the media to dispel their message or their policy. If Trump continues to work against the credibility of the new agencies so adept at doing just that, he will eventually find that he has drilled holes in his own ship.

It is important then that Mr. Trump begins to repair the foundation he has so quickly started to crumble. In many ways this is not a process that would be hard to do. In fact, all it takes is a simple change in vocabulary. In his interviews and press conferences, when pressed, the president has expressed dissatisfaction with negative portrayals of stories he recognizes as foundationally true. 

What Mr. Trump is actually pointing out is a problem that has been around as long as news has, media bias, the use of specific wording and careful selection of interviews, hosts and stories to portray a more negative or positive image of a subject. If Mr. Trump would start asking for more neutral coverage of his policies and actions from not only organizations that typically disagree with him, like CNN, but also with organizations that tend to be biased in favor of him, like Fox News, rather than declaring news that seems biased against him as “fake,” he would be doing both sides a favor.

If he chooses instead to continue on this path of sabotaging mainstream media, the sources of news and information most available to Americans, be they supporters or “Never-Trumpers,” he will have set the nation on a dangerous course toward ignorance and disenfranchisement.

Only time will tell, but here’s to hoping that he makes the right decision.