crumbling Freedom of the Press too divisive to discuss?

As I interpret this, some press members were denied entry to an invitation-only press event.

It was my understanding that almost all government press events are in fact invitation only. The student news papers, the radical right or left, and the community newsletter reporter are not generally given invitations nor admitted.

But dirtbag, weren't many press representatives present at this conference? That is hardly the same as not speaking to the press. And doesn't Trump post on social media?
I doubt that any press will be intimidated by not being invited: I think most press people are able to find ways to express themselves and their opinions, slanted or not. I give you the linked site from Crankster as an example. I imagine they have a significant following.
ff

...least biased and most accurate reporters I could find...

Unfortunately, the most accurate and least biased reporters are likely forced to choose other careers.

The Guardian reports:

A participant, paraphrasing McMaster, said: “He said he doesn’t want to call it radical Islamic terrorism because the terrorists are, quote, ‘un-Islamic’.”

McMaster, the participant said, indicated that the phrase castigates “an entire religion” and “he’s not on board”.

At the meeting, multiple sources said, McMaster discomfited White House staffers who view the terrorist threat in those religious terms and who were said to have exchanged awkward looks with each other.

A participant, paraphrasing McMaster, said: “He said he doesn’t want to call it radical Islamic terrorism because the terrorists are, quote, ‘un-Islamic’.”

McMaster, the participant said, indicated that the phrase castigates “an entire religion” and “he’s not on board”.

At the meeting, multiple sources said, McMaster discomfited White House staffers who view the terrorist threat in those religious terms and who were said to have exchanged awkward looks with each other.

I like the words "Right Wing Extremist Terrorism"