Independent journalist and prolific tweeter Aaron Rupar posted this on X on Wednesday: “Trump may not have left his private country club for the better part of a week, but he’s posting lots of videos on Truth Social this afternoon — so maybe that’s almost as good as campaigning?”

I’m not sure if Rupar was being 100% serious, but his post actually did raise an intriguing question.

Trump — standing in front of two American flags while wearing a navy blue suit with a white shirt and blue-and-white striped tie — put out a slew of quick videos on his Truth Social. Some were as short as 14 seconds. One went for just over a minute. The rest were in between, usually in the 40-second range. They all ended with the official “Trump/Vance, Make America Great Again” sign with a number to text donations.

They were, in effect, commercials that talked a little about his policies, but mostly about why his opponent, Kamala Harris, should not be president.

Scratch that. They weren’t commercials. They were rally speeches, minus the crowds and, mostly, minus Trump’s rambling detours down meandering paths and bizarre rabbit holes.

Now, don’t get it wrong. Trump, of course, couldn’t help himself. He didn’t talk about sharks or electric cars in the water, but the videos were full of his go-to lines about Harris, calling her a communist and “Comrade Kamala.”

But, compared to his usual long-winded rally speeches with his supporters in the background all looking the same — Trump hats, MAGA T-shirts and that bored look that usually sets in after 20 minutes or so — these videos seemed at least to be a little more focused.

Was Trump’s team behind these videos as a way to keep Trump on point? It sure seems like it.

But was it effective?

His base probably ate it up. But did anyone outside his base see the videos? Are there many people on Truth Social who are not Trump supporters? Is there anybody on Truth Social who wasn’t already going to vote for Trump?

In other words, who is he talking to in these videos? And can videos replace actually going out to communities? (But it should be noted that Trump had a town hall with Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Wednesday night.)

Still, an interesting strategy to use social media to make speeches.

While we’re on the topic of Trump …

Politico senior political columnist Jonathan Martin had an interesting piece on Wednesday: “If Republicans Want to Win, They Need Trump to Lose — Big.”

Wait, what? What does that mean?

Martin suggests that if Republicans want to regain control of their party, they need Trump to lose — and lose big enough that even his cries of “the election was rigged” will seem obviously ridiculous.

Martin writes, “The best possible outcome in November for the future of the Republican Party is for former President Donald Trump to lose and lose soundly. GOP leaders won’t tell you that on the record. I just did.”

Martin later writes what this all comes down to: “The broader question among Republicans: Would it be best to endure a Harris presidency to keep Trump out of power, likely for good? Or is the better way to hasten his departure from the scene for him to win so that he could only serve one more term and be done for certain in 2028?”

There’s always the possibility that Trump could lose, complain about being cheated, and somehow keep his grip on the Republican Party. But that would be back-to-back presidential losses for Trump and, come 2028, he would be 82 years old.

Martin writes, “So, yes, moving past Trump in the aftermath of another defeat will hardly be easy. But it’s essential if Republicans want to become a viable national party once more.”

Roundtable discussions

All week, I’ve been writing about a first-of-its-kind report from the Poynter Institute examining current trends in the news and media industry called “OnPoynt — Values Rising: Trends and traction in journalism and the news industry.”

On Wednesday in New York City, Poynter president Neil Brown hosted three roundtable discussions on the state of the news industry. The conversations featured media figures from The Washington Post, The New York Times, TIME and Bloomberg News, as well as influencers and independent journalists.

My Poynter colleague Angela Fu, wrote about some of the highlights of the roundtables. Fu wrote, “Using the report as a jumping-off point, panelists broke down the myth of news avoidance and analyzed the influence of artificial intelligence and other technology on the industry.”

Be sure to check out her story from some of the more thought-provoking comments from the roundtables.

Tom Terrific?

Tom Brady is seen at an NFL preseason game on Aug. 11. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)

The NFL’s regular season gets started this week and the most anticipated game is Dallas vs. Cleveland. It might not be the best game of the weekend (although, it should be pretty darn good), but interest is high because Tom Brady will make his debut as an analyst on Fox Sports’ top broadcasting team.

“It can’t get here soon enough,” Brady told Fox Sports radio host Colin Cowherd.

Brady is generally considered the greatest quarterback in the history of the game, and you could make a case that he is the best football player of all time. But just because he was spectacular on the field doesn’t automatically mean he will be good in the booth.

So that’s the question: How will Brady do as an announcer?

For starters, let’s be fair and not judge him after one game.

But here’s what most critics will be listening for: Can someone who clearly knows the game be able to explain what is happening in quick, 10-15 second bursts.

The Athletic’s Andrew Marchant wrote, “What Brady has tried to learn, and what he figures to improve upon as he takes more reps throughout the season, is the timing during the game. There is a finite amount of seconds to speak between plays. What the average fan needs to understand is different from what a quarterback trying to win each down needs to know.

To use quarterbacking parlance, Brady has worked to make his progressions quick, while displaying personality. He has learned the mechanics, focusing on making one point instead of several at a time.”

My quick prediction is Brady will be great because he wants to be great and, word is, he has prepared meticulously.

Marchant reports that not only has Brady talked extensively with the other top NFL analysts (CBS’ Tony Romo, ESPN’s Troy Aikman and NBC’s Cris Collinsworth), but has gone over game details — such as being able to talk when a producer is talking in your earpiece — as well as actually calling old games and having a couple of live rehearsals.

One Brady colleague told Marchant, “He’s a grinder.”

The other big question: Will Brady be willing to be critical — something that many new analysts struggle with. Again, I predict good things from Brady. Even though he knows how hard it is to be an NFL quarterback, he also is the best to ever do it. Who is better equipped to say how things are supposed to be done?

Meanwhile, check out The Ringer’s Bryan Curtis, who wrote, “How Fox Threw a Tom Brady Hail Mary and Won.” It goes behind the scenes with how Fox managed to land the all-time best quarterback for a broadcasting job that he had never shown an interest in and all the moving pieces that have taken place to make Brady Fox’s No. 1 analyst.

Media tidbits

• The Washington Post’s Naomi Nix with “Meta content court rules ‘from the river to the sea’ isn’t hate speech.”
• The Wall Street Journal’s Becky Peterson and Micah Maidenberg with “SpaceX Pulls Employees From Brazil, Discourages Travel There, as Musk Battles Court Over X.”
• Speaking of Musk, Mediaite’s Ahmad Austin Jr. with “Elon Musk Deletes Tweet Promoting Tucker Carlson’s Interview With Hitler-Loving ‘Historian.’”
• The Washington Post’s Jeremy Barr with “Mehdi Hasan saw a market for a new kind of media company. So far, so good.”
• Nieman Lab’s Sarah Scire with “The Salt Lake Tribune, profitable and growing, seeks to rid itself of that ‘necessary evil’ — the paywall.”

Hot type

If you read only one thing today, read this. It’s hard to get through, but an important look into domestic violence and the criminal justice system. For The New York Times, contributing Opinion writer Rachel Louise Snyder, who has written extensively about domestic abuse, with “Who Gets to Kill in Self-Defense?”

More resources for journalists

• Public media journalists: Applications for our Digital Transformation Program close Friday!
• Journalists of color: Find your voice in Power of Diverse Voices. Closes tomorrow!
• Lead With Influence is for leaders who manage big responsibilities but have no direct reports.

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at tjones@poynter.org.

The Poynter Report is our daily media newsletter. To have it delivered to your inbox Monday-Friday, sign up here.