• Frank Rich in New York magazine:

“The news value of last week’s tweets should not be underestimated.”

Mr. Rich doesn’t believe that the president’s comments on Twitter are a sophisticated strategy to distract from a week of bad policy news. “The tweets are news in themselves,” he writes, and they demonstrate a “new level of Trump mental instability.” The news media has an obligation to cover them and, in the case of the alleged blackmail effort to use the National Enquirer as a “cudgel” against Joe Scarborough and Ms. Brzezinski, an obligation to follow up. Read more »

_____

• Bob Cesca in Salon:

“History will decide whether it’s patriotic to encourage the president to continue to destroy the dignity of the office, establishing that from here on out it’s O.K. for the supposed leader of the free world to behave like a Twitter troll.”

Mr. Cesca worries that Mr. Trump may have tarnished the presidency “beyond repair.” He writes that the job of the news media is to hold the president accountable, the job of activists is to resist policies they find objectionable, and the job of the president is to “set an example of calmness, decency and rationality — to rise above the pettiness and the vindictive shovel fights occurring in the darker corners of the internet.” Read more »

_____

• Adrienne LaFrance in The Atlantic:

“When one of the people involved in a Twitter fight isn’t just a public official but also the president of the United States, is it fair to consider anyone he’s attacking an equal player in a fight?”

Do the president’s actions constitute a breach of Twitter’s terms of service? Ms. LaFrance wonders what ethical, legal and corporate responsibility Twitter has “when one of its users — who is also the president of the United States, by the way — incessantly publishes attacks against individuals.” Read more »