- The tense Oval Office exchange between President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been portrayed differently by left and right-leaning media. Word choices in headlines reveal sensationalist bias, shaping public perception before readers engage with the full articles.
- Left-leaning outlets largely condemned Trump, framing his comments as an attack on Zelenskyy, while right-leaning media criticized Zelenskyy’s stance and lack of gratitude.
- The fallout from the meeting has led to a freeze in U.S. military aid to Ukraine and uncertainty over the minerals agreement. Public support for Ukraine has also continued to decline.
Full Story
A tense conversation between President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has dominated the news cycle, with reactions largely divided along party lines. Media coverage of the event has reflected political biases, shaping public perception of the meeting.
Media narratives and a misleading fact-check
Mainstream media outlets offered starkly different takes on Trump’s handling of the meeting. Left-leaning commentators framed it as a concession to Russia:
- “Now standing against our allies of the last 80 years, now siding with Russia,” MSNBC Host Rachel Maddow said. “No longer siding with the free world, now siding with authoritarian governments.”
- “Maybe, as some have speculated, that was a premeditated ambush,” MSNBC Host Jen Psaki said. “Or maybe that was just a big gift to his pal Vladimir Putin.”
Conversely, right-leaning media focused on Zelenskyy’s conduct:
- “Have you ever seen a foreign leader come into the Oval Office and talk this way?” Fox News Host Jesse Watters said. “Everyone knows if Zelenskyy had come in, signed the deal, showed some gratitude, it would’ve gone a long way.”
- “We’re not going to be disrespected, we’re not going to be swindled, we will not be bullied,” Fox News Host Sean Hannity said. “The Ukrainian president, frankly, in many ways, disgraced himself.”
Media headlines reflect bias
News articles from both political sides published stories labeled as objective news, not opinion pieces, revealing media bias in word choice.
Left-leaning coverage:
The Atlantic: “The Real Reason Trump Berated Zelenskyy”
- Subheadline: “He Simply Likes Vladimir Putin Better.”
- The use of “berated” sensationalizes Trump’s actions, and the subheadline presents an opinion as fact without evidence.
The New York Times: “In Showdown With Zelenskyy, Trump Takes Offense on Putin’s Behalf”
- Subheadline: “Never in the past few decades at least has an American president engaged in such an angry, scathing attack on a visiting foreign leader in the Oval Office.”
- The phrase “On Putin’s behalf” suggests Trump was not acting in U.S. interests but rather defending Putin. This is the writer’s interpretation of events presented as fast. “Angry, scathing attack” are emotionally charged words designed to provoke a reaction.
Right-leaning coverage:
Breitbart: “Trump Levels Zelenskyy”
- Subheadline: “President Donald Trump leveled Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a tense exchange in front of the media, reminding Zelenskyy that he is not in the position to tell America what it is going to feel in relation to their war.”
- The term “levels” paints Zelenskyy as defeated, shaping a reader’s perception before reading the article. The subheadline implies Zelenskyy overstepped and was put in his place, a writer’s interpretation of events stated as fact.
The Federalist: “In Oval Office Temper Tantrum, Zelenskyy Blows Up Peace Talks”
- Subheadline: Suggests Zelenskyy attempted to “strong-arm” the U.S.
- “Temper tantrum” portrays Zelenskyy as childish, inserting opinion into the headline. Also, saying Zelenskyy is “strong-arming” the U.S. includes the writer’s opinion but is stated as fact.
The meeting and its fallout
Leading up to the meeting, Republican and Democratic lawmakers advised Zelenskyy to avoid confrontation, express gratitude and sign the minerals agreement. The agreement would grant the U.S. access to Ukraine’s natural resources and potentially deter Russian aggression. This is according to multiple media reports citing the lawmakers present in those talks.
Despite differing views on security guarantees, both sides signaled a readiness to sign the agreement. However, during the Oval Office meeting, Vance suggested the path to peace would be diplomatic negotiations.
At this point, Zelenskyy raised concerns about Russia’s history of breaking diplomatic deals, leading to a breakdown in talks. Trump and Vance criticized Zelenskyy for questioning negotiation talks, which ultimately resulted in no minerals deal being signed.
Fact-checking discrepancies
Media fact-checking of Vance’s claim that Zelenskyy had not expressed gratitude during the meeting highlighted partisan biases. CNN, Politifact, and PBS, all left-leaning news outlets, published fact-checks listing instances of Zelenskyy thanking the U.S. in the past.
Vance: Zelenskyy has not said, “Thank you” to the United States for its support of Ukraine.
This is inaccurate. Vance and Trump repeatedly chided Zelenskyy for not expressing more thanks to the U.S. But there have been many instances in which Zelenskyy has expressed his gratitude to the American people before and after Trump took office.
PolitiFact’s fact-check on Vance
However, the fact-check omitted the specific context of Vance’s question, which referred only to that meeting.
“Have you said thank you once in this entire meeting?” Vance asked. “In this entire meeting, have you said thank you?”
A review of the meeting’s transcript showed that Zelenskyy had said “thank you” twice, once in his opening remarks and again after showing Trump photos of returned prisoners.
Biden also accused Zelenskyy of being ungrateful
In the summer of 2022, President Biden held a phone call with Zelenskyy. Sources told NBC News that months later, the phone call was heated. Officials told the media Biden got frustrated and told Zelenskyy he “could be a little bit more grateful.”
NBC News reported that at the time, Biden knew the narrative needed to be that Zelenskyy was grateful if the amount of U.S. support for Ukraine would hold.
Public support for Ukraine, Zelenskyy has fallen
Polls cited by CNN in February 2022 found that 7% of U.S. adults said U.S. support for Ukraine was too much. In February 2025, that number significantly rose to 41%.
In the same polling segment, participants were asked if they were confident Zelenskyy “will do the right thing.” 72% had confidence in Zelenskyy in 2022; in 2024, that number dropped to 48%.
Where things stand
Trump paused arms shipments to Ukraine on Monday, March 3, saying they will remain paused until he feels Zelenskyy is ready to negotiate. Zelenskyy remains interested in signing the minerals agreement, posting a statement on X that the meeting was “regrettable” and that he is ready for negotiations. Some reports suggest Trump and Zelenskyy could sign a minerals agreement before Trump’s address to Congress.
Bias Breakdown takeaways
This episode of Bias Breakdown analyzed the media’s coverage of a tense Oval Office meeting between President Trump, Vice President Pence and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy.
It showed how left-leaning outlets framed Trump’s actions as an attack on Ukraine, while right-leaning media criticized Zelenskyy’s conduct. Discrepancies in headlines and fact-checking highlighted bias in reporting, influencing public perception.
Ultimately, this segment aims to help viewers identify and separate media spin from the facts.