A Facebook friend of mine recently noted that America’s “greatest president,” Ronald Reagan, would be 102 today and lamented the economic course on which the nation has set under President Obama.

I responded with a short note that questioned whether the economy has “collapsed,” as he had said. Then a friend of his fired back a note, apparently challenging my assertion about the state of the economy, that noted the media report “nothing negative” about Obama.

I could hardly hold back the laughter. Of course the media have reported plenty of negatives about the president: the jobless recovery, the tragedy that occurred last September in Benghazi, the mounting debt and budget deficit, the continuing war in Afghanistan, the president’s failure to close Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba and … well, you get the point.

I’m sure I’ve missed someone’s hot-button issue.

But my intent is to suggest that the media haven’t protected Obama from criticism. How do I know that? Consider all the negative comments that show up on social media outlets, on websites all across the Internet and the infinite sources of opinions being offered by commentators of all stripes. They all represent the “media.” The fact that these items are seen, heard and read by Americans, who then distribute them on social media outlets suggests to me that the media – liberal and conservative alike – are doing their job.

Does the president have his friends in the media? Certainly he does, just as George W. Bush had his media allies. Every president dating back almost to the beginning of the Republic has cultivated his share of media friends and had to cope with his share of media foes.

To suggest the current president is being sheltered, pampered and protected by the media illustrates a profound naivete.