So we use the usual rule of thumb to claim it's a recession when it's a good thing, but instead try claim it's not a recession until a given think-tank says so when it's a bad thing.
If there is some desire to obfuscate what is actually going on in "the media", well, the media is doing a pretty shitty job of obfuscating it. All the major news outlets have the GDP report as top news stories on their sites. Some easy "liberal media" examples:
1. NYTimes: "G.D.P. Report Shows a Drop, Fanning Fears of a U.S. Recession - A key measure of economic output fell for the second straight quarter, raising fears that the United States could be entering a recession."
2. WaPo: "What causes a recession? The dominoes leading toward a new recession have started falling, so what happens next? There are two scenarios that could play out." And also "U.S. economy shrinks again in 2nd quarter, reviving recession fears", and perhaps very relevant to this discussion, "The 8 economists who decide if the U.S. is in a recession"
So the major news outlets are accurately (and loudly) reporting what is going on. I know in my lifetime it has pretty much always been argued that the official "start and end dates" of recessions are marked after the fact (e.g. I recall clearly the start date for the Great Recession was pushed earlier by the NBER after their research had concluded). But these news outlets certainly aren't hiding anything, nor even trying to dissemble - they're just reporting things as the current facts show.
But then some conspiracy theorists (and yes, I believe that term totally applies) are trying to argue that because news outlets aren't saying "we are officially in a recession" that it is "Orwellian".
The constant whining by Trump and his supporters over "the media is so mean to me" has long since passed Chicken Little proportions.
> Now suddenly it's questionable, because the current administration would like to shrug away its failures, and too many in the media are helping them do it.
Whether or not I agree with the assessment of the current administration wanting to "shrug away its failures" has nothing to do with it. The parent comment was clearly arguing the theory, which is total bullshit on its face, that the reason it hasn't been officially designated a recession is because the administration doesn't want it to. The reason this theory is total bullshit is because it's pretty obvious the administration has no control over how the NBER marks recessions.
I think it's fair to designate theories which are total bullshit on their faces as "conspiracy theories".