|
...is the sound of our brains being turned into Malto Meal by mass media mindlessness.
You mention that corporate media may be the worst problem of all and, despite an array of current crises so formidable that I'm not sure the republic can survive their cumulative destructive influence, I think the devolution of US mass media into infotainment purveyors and disinformation propagandists has absolutely destroyed this country's collective ability to recognize truth, even when it bites them in the ass. After all, John Stossel is a network star and Bill Moyers is on PBS. What else would you need to know?
Corporate America is in sole control of mass media’s singular ability to define and delimit the boundaries of acceptable opinion, which in this case means bringing the American political agenda into close alignment with the corporate wish list – no taxes, no unions, no governmental oversight by the SEC or FTC, no enforcement of regulations governing monopolistic practices, product safety, labor-management relations or toxic emissions.
TV is the most efficient and powerful indoctrination machine ever built. And because about 92 percent of Americans say TV is their sole or primary source of information, that's the medium where corporate America focuses most of its efforts to legitimize its agenda and take it mainstream. As a result, TV is where corporate values – summed up as "all for us, nothing for you" – are touted most lovingly and creatively, both in nightly entertainment programming and in what’s hilariously known as newscasts.
But here's the thing: I don't think corporate media is either for or against the GOP or the Democrats any longer. I think it's more in favor of the Norquist model, which is that all government is bad -- except for the Pentagon -- and must be muzzled if business, and capitalism in general, are to flourish. Therefore, it's dead set against the FDR model of an activist federal government using its influence and resources to actually help ordinary people.
So I think mass media has evolved beyond its initial biases and has transcended the GOP vs. Dem paradigm. I think mass media now stands for elimination of government -- at least the part that affects corporate America -- and that so far the GOP has been the better party to use to achieve that objective. But times are a'changin' and new political realities are upon us.
The GOP is toxic to most voters and a continuation of the policies that have enriched corporate America since January 2001 have fallen from public favor. It's fairly likely that Democrats will win the presidency and increase their majorities in the House and Senate.
Fortunately for corporate America, that no longer conveys the populist threat to their continued profitability it once did. Democrats have "evolved" and can be just as generous as the GOP when it comes to rewarding those who bribed them during their campaigns.
So there are enough corporatist candidates, wallowing in corporate money, running on the Democratic side -- who just happen to be the same ones mass media has anointed as front-runners -- that corporate America can play both sides of the chessboard and still come out with their position secure for another four years.
This is also why people like Kucinich, Edwards (now that he's on the populist stump), Gravel and Paul must be branded unelectable and (ahem) maybe just a little weird. Killing the messenger is vital because, when Americans are polled on the issues and not the candidates, Kucinich's message beats the hell out of the centrist garbage the "top-tier" candidates are selling.
But when his message is linked with him personally, those numbers go down as months of mass media programming kicks in and suddenly they're not looking at issues, but at a little guy with gnomish features and a mid-west twang who has been portrayed as a fringe figure and a loser.
Anyway, I have no evidence to support the thesis that corporate media no longer favors the GOP exclusively because they a) probably can't get elected to any position of power in 2008 (absent voting machine fraud, caging, felon lists, etc., of course), b) there are Democratic candidates who will stand by their corporations just as loyally as would the GOP candidates, so party affiliation is no longer of much use, and c) they may actually be concerned that some batshit crazy fundie loon like Huckabee, or an equally loony Romney, or a mobbed-up ghoul like the Saint of 9/11 could win the election and make Bush/Cheney look smart and sane by comparison.
So, is this possible, reasonable, probable? Or am I so full of it that it was nearly impossible to read this post all the way to... HERE.
wp
|