Tapper Admits Media Failure on Biden—But Conservatives Call Out Double Standard

Paul Riverbank, 12/16/2025 Jake Tapper’s introspection on presidential health coverage and Sage Steele’s principled criticism spotlight the ongoing challenge: media trust hinges on applying the same rigorous scrutiny to all leaders, no matter the party. Only true evenhandedness can restore public confidence in journalism.

These days, Tapper insists things are different on his show. Discussions around presidential fitness—especially when the president could serve into his 80s—are routine, he says. That, he contends, is a conscious corrective after “what happened with Biden,” a scenario he won’t let slide again. “It’s not just fair game,” Tapper told his audience, eyebrows raised in emphasis, “it’s our job.”

But that candor comes at a tricky time for media credibility. Take a look online, or better yet, at Sunday morning roundtable chatter, and it’s clear many conservatives see a double standard at play. Tapper can say he’s making up for past lapses, but skeptics ask: Shouldn’t the media have held both parties to the same standard all along? As one critic (whose voice crackled through a conservative talk-radio segment this week) put it, “Going tough on a GOP president after being soft on the last one—how does that fix trust?” In their eyes, overcorrection isn’t equanimity. It risks looking like partisanship in a different suit.

On the other hand, the perception problem isn’t easily solved by good intentions. The power the press wields—in shaping not just the national conversation, but what even becomes the conversation—is hard to ignore. Americans, from Twitter to town halls, are increasingly vocal about holding journalists’ feet to the fire. “Walk the walk, don’t just talk the talk,” as a retired teacher in Akron recently emailed me after seeing coverage whipsaw between administrations.

In the same news cycle, Sage Steele—no stranger to media controversy herself—added another dimension to the debate. Though she’s long been regarded as a Trump backer, Steele didn’t hesitate to call out the former president after a particularly harsh tweet about the late Rob Reiner. Her words were direct: “This tweet is so disappointing. And so unnecessary. It’s comments like this that take away from the countless great things Trump does for America.” For a public figure who’s often faced backlash from all angles, her candor stood out.

Put all this together, and you realize the challenge for journalism isn’t just to ask tough questions, but to do so relentlessly, no matter who is in office—or which way the political winds are blowing. Tapper’s moment of reflection, paired with Steele’s willingness to break party ranks, underscores that point. Because for all the slogans about fairness and truth, trust is earned one uncomfortable question—and one honest answer—at a time.

If you caught Jake Tapper’s latest on-air reflection, you might have noticed a rare moment of self-scrutiny from the veteran anchor. In one of those candid detours that viewers tend to remember, Tapper admitted what many in media have quietly wondered: “We didn’t ask as many questions as we should have at the time,” referring to the newsrooms’ coverage—or lack thereof—on President Biden’s health and age. This wasn’t a tossed-off line. Tapper doubled back to that thought, almost circling it, as if unsettled by how recent history had unfolded.These days, Tapper insists things are different on his show. Discussions around presidential fitness—especially when the president could serve into his 80s—are routine, he says. That, he contends, is a conscious corrective after “what happened with Biden,” a scenario he won’t let slide again. “It’s not just fair game,” Tapper told his audience, eyebrows raised in emphasis, “it’s our job.”But that candor comes at a tricky time for media credibility. Take a look online, or better yet, at Sunday morning roundtable chatter, and it’s clear many conservatives see a double standard at play. Tapper can say he’s making up for past lapses, but skeptics ask: Shouldn’t the media have held both parties to the same standard all along? As one critic (whose voice crackled through a conservative talk-radio segment this week) put it, “Going tough on a GOP president after being soft on the last one—how does that fix trust?” In their eyes, overcorrection isn’t equanimity. It risks looking like partisanship in a different suit.On the other hand, the perception problem isn’t easily solved by good intentions. The power the press wields—in shaping not just the national conversation, but what even becomes the conversation—is hard to ignore. Americans, from Twitter to town halls, are increasingly vocal about holding journalists’ feet to the fire. “Walk the walk, don’t just talk the talk,” as a retired teacher in Akron recently emailed me after seeing coverage whipsaw between administrations.In the same news cycle, Sage Steele—no stranger to media controversy herself—added another dimension to the debate. Though she’s long been regarded as a Trump backer, Steele didn’t hesitate to call out the former president after a particularly harsh tweet about the late Rob Reiner. Her words were direct: “This tweet is so disappointing. And so unnecessary. It’s comments like this that take away from the countless great things Trump does for America.” For a public figure who’s often faced backlash from all angles, her candor stood out.Put all this together, and you realize the challenge for journalism isn’t just to ask tough questions, but to do so relentlessly, no matter who is in office—or which way the political winds are blowing. Tapper’s moment of reflection, paired with Steele’s willingness to break party ranks, underscores that point. Because for all the slogans about fairness and truth, trust is earned one uncomfortable question—and one honest answer—at a time.