Relations between President Donald Trump and the US press is rocky, to say the least. It began during election campaign. Many thought it would get better once Trump would be elected, but on the contrary, it has been worsening since he became President. Trump's assault on press seems relentless. He tweets about it and he attacks media whenever he opens his mouth. He vehemently attacked media when he spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

The bitter relations between the White House and the press are neither uncommon nor unprecedented. We still remember, it was the press that brought down the presidency of Richard Nixon. But it seems Trump is taking his fight with American media to a different level. It became a routine for Trump to point fingers to the press gallery in his campaign rallies and call the journalists "the most dishonest people" in the world. He continued his tirade and in his latest tweet he called media the "enemy" of the people.

As Trump heated the anti-media rhetoric, journalists were slow to respond, but it appears gloves are off now. Many reporters and commentators are calling Trump a "liar" on national television, which is unprecedented. Historically, press, albeit critical to the White House and the Administration, showed deference to the office of the Presidency and rarely used the "L" word when talking about the President.

By now, not only Americans but also people in the world who follow news understand that Trump has a thin skin and he does not like criticism. This explains Trump's constant rant about media, but he does it for another apparent reason: his political base loves to see media confronted by Trump, who they consider a champion of their cause.

If you follow US media, you will notice that journalists are becoming nervous and taking Trump's threats more seriously. They have good reasons to be nervous. Two law professors recently wrote in an opinion piece in New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/opinion/dont-expect-the-first-amendment-to-protect-the-media.html?_r=0) that "The truth is, legal protections for press freedom are far feebler than you may think. Even more worrisome, they have been weakening in recent years." Law professors Ron Nell Andersen Jones and Sonja R. West wrote in their piece that it's not the law but the "customs and traditions" which primarily protect journalists. And this tradition can significantly be eroded on the face of constant onslaught from President Trump.

The question is: how can media confront this attack? In fact, Trump enjoys constant bickering with the press, because it gives him the focus he so desperately desires. The media can fight Trump's attack by going back to basics - pursuing traditional journalism with a zeal of reporting facts. Not just superficial facts, such as the crowd size in Trump's inauguration, but more consequential information such as Trump campaign team's communication with Russian election and the consequences of Trump's policies. Real investigative reporting is the way to fight Trump attacks. But do media have the tools and resources?             

Even though US media have always been business entities and maximising profits drove media operations, there was a time when media embarked on journalism that focused on vigorous investigation and acted as real watchdogs. They had the resources to do their jobs. However, as corporate control crept into media industries, the model of newsroom operation changed significantly. The size of newsroom staff dwindled and foreign bureaus of news organisations slashed. An American Society of News Editors found that newsrooms have been losing jobs since the economic recession of 2007-2008. The industry reported a job loss of 3,800 in 2014 alone (https://www.poynter.org/2015/newspaper-industry-lost-3800-full-time-editorial-professionals-in-2014/360633). News media experienced deep cuts in their news budget and news media laid off thousands of editorial staffs. That compromised news media's ability to invest in issue-based and investigative reporting.

So, how can new media survive Trump's attacks? As many commentators caution, journalists should not frame it as a fight between media and Trump. They should just do their job. Better.

Competition from digital web-based media further deteriorated traditional news media's financial health. In the advent of digital news media, it was obvious that advertising dollars will be diverted to those media, but increasingly non-news websites are receiving a lion's share of advertising dollars. An estimate shows that in 2015, USD 59.6 billion was spent in all digital media sites including search engines but a whopping USD 38.5 billion went to non-news sites like Facebook, Google, Verizon, Twitter and Yahoo (http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/digital-news-revenue-fact-sheet/)             

Traditional news media explored a variety of models to attract audiences and advertising revenues. But it appears corporate owners did not want to invest in news rooms, which forced news executives and editors to cut staff and close foreign bureaus. News media, especially cable and network televisions, pursued a style of newsroom practice, which media scholars referred to as "infotainment."

Providing information and entertainment is considered the classical functions of mass media in a democratic and capitalist society. Traditionally, media have been keeping those functions separate. But, recently scholars and media critics are observing that media, especially electronic media, are mixing the two. It is a growing trend that electronic media present information wrapped in entertainment. The practice of infotainment appears to be an attractive option to the media executives because potentially it may attract more viewers and added revenues. However, this practice erodes informational function of media. Traditional news media's job is to provide citizens with critical information and analysis. Citizens need unadulterated information so that they can make informed decisions about public affairs. Therefore, democratic systems largely depend on media's ability and willingness to provide information to citizens. Media as capitalist enterprises partly lost their social responsibility over the decades, and no wonder they also lost credibility as a social and political institution. Trump's attacks on media should be viewed in this financial and cultural context.

So, how can new media survive Trump's attacks? As many commentators caution, journalists should not frame it as a fight between media and Trump. They should just do their job. Better.

The writer teaches media and communication at a US college.