Advertisement

US media fawn over Trudeau, Obama ‘bromance’

Is Trudeau and Obama’s bromance politically beneficial?
WATCH: It's no secret Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and U.S. President Barack Obama hit it off, but is there a risk of being too "buddy-buddy"? Eric Sorensen reports.

Forget the historical significance of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s first official visit to the White House, or the glitz and glamour that was the state dinner in his honour – it seems a budding “bromance” between Trudeau and President Obama is American media’s more favourable storyline of this trip.

While American media outlets covered the official ceremonies and policy announcements that followed Trudeau’s welcome Thursday, there seemed to be a lot more attention put on our “famously dreamy” prime minister (Boston Globe columnist Rebecca Ostriker’s words, not ours) and what some described as a loving gaze for the U.S. President.

One of those gazes even ended up on the front page of the New York Times.

nty-trudeau

Many of the articles published by U.S. media outlets described the state dinner as feeling like “a family reunion” of sorts – often referencing Trudeau’s father, who attended two state dinners at the White House while serving as prime minister.

Story continues below advertisement

“Indeed, the state dinner, the first for a Canadian prime minister in nearly two decades and most likely one of President Obama’s last, had the air of a belated family reunion between two countries sharing the world’s longest international border, not to mention professional sports, celebrities, cuisine and culture,” read The New York Times.

Of course, there was no lack of mention of Trudeau’s looks, which seemed to captivate many U.S. citizens on social media.

Time described Trudeau as a “handsome new leader” with an “enchanting young family.”

The visit even landed him on Buzzfeed’s “Hot Guys” newsletter.

Overall, it seems American media was quite taken with our leader – even if some weren’t exactly sure of his title.

Time originally called the prime minister a “premier” in one of their articles. So did the New York Times.