You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience.

Brave New Media

The Huffington Post logo The Huffington Post 9/03/2016 Ben Evans
TV © sh22 via Getty Images TV

It is the duty of any individual remaining a fire-keeper of reason to often and with rigor interrogate not only their convictions and beliefs, but the very foundations of all information they themselves, at any point, deem fact. This scrutiny must be constant and ever-fluid like the nature of knowing itself. Such is the good and necessary work of both a responsible human being and an examined life. I do my best to be attendant to these principles, and value them as much as I do rational discourse and a good minestrone soup. I've parsed and scoured much available information--all the while maintaining a stringent degree of skepticism towards my own faculties and judgement--but can no longer withhold the following, hopefully earned, conclusion: The current election cycle for the American Presidency has descended into dangerously Orwellian territory and media outlets, once trusted, are complicit and conscious in manipulating its outcome. Nowhere is this fact more evident than in the media's coverage of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders presidential bid, where, employing tactics of omission, obfuscation, and--most egregious by far--the deliberate creation and proliferation of misinformation, the media has proven itself to be no more committed to accuracy than a poet hired through Craigslist to write a birthday card for your cousin thrice removed.
Prior to reading the rest of this piece, I urge you to perform a simple test in order to draw your own conclusion regarding the above position: Clear your browser's history, or "cache," and Google "Hillary Clinton." Clear that history again and Google "Bernie Sanders." Note before conducting this experiment that, as of March 9th, 2016, Clinton has won 745 delegates to Sanders 540. Upon doing this, I'm quite confident that any objective reader will be able to discern, without much difficulty, the media's overwhelming inclination to both christen and portray Clinton as the de facto Democratic nominee. If the pudding, too, be SEO, analytics, and sponsored content, the proof lies also therein.
Despite Bernie Sander's crucial Democratic Primary win in Michigan on Tuesday, March 8th, as of Monday, March 7th RealClearPolitics appears to have omitted Sanders in reporting general election polls.
It is important to note that in spite of RealClearPolitics omission, The Huffington Post--tracking a compendium of 38 separate polls-- shows an 11 point lead in a Sanders vs. Trump general election, demonstrating a margin of victory upwards of three points higher than Clinton's in the same matchup. This fact illuminates another inconsistency--despite the majority of the media's purported (and profitable) shock and revulsion at Donald Trump's ascendance, and a general acknowledgment that a Trump presidency would mean disaster, the media consistently fails to draw attention to the fact that Sanders is projected to win in near landslide fashion in a general election vs. Trump, while Clinton--in some places by as much as six points--less so. Even the CNN News Group--an outlet that has been even more overt than others in demonstrating allegiance to Clinton; an outlet whose parent company, Time Warner, has donated, through both PACs and individuals, $591,542 to Clinton since 1992--projected, on March 1st, that Sanders would beat Trump 55% to 43% in a general election, while Clinton would win 52% to 44%. By neglecting to emphasize these projections, the media's seeming aversion to a Trump Presidency is called into question. Not unrelated, and as indicative of the American media's current state, is a religious preoccupation with the shoot-me-stupid, inane, and unintelligible dross that Donald Trump emits like a pin-pricked mole. This commitment to giving airtime to a bigoted and ludicrous television star perhaps evidences something far more sinister: Trump as fascist, bubble-gum pop decoy used to drown out the noise of both rising crises in America--income inequality, poverty, Flint's water system, racially-driven police violence--and the peacefully mounting revolution against the big money status quo of which the media is comfortably a part.
Consider the night of Tuesday, March 8th: Hillary Clinton, after being defeated in the Michigan primary in stunning fashion, is giving a stump speech in Ohio in which she will presumably react in some way to the results in Michigan--in lieu of any major news network airing the entirety of Clinton's speech, everyone immediately tuned to Donald Trump, and remained on him for the duration of an hour, as he commenced talking about nothing. It might be too presumptuous to call this a look over there wallet-pickpocket flimflam, but I will. Given what was happening in Michigan, it was no doubt wise to draw attention from Clinton and a potential instance of (minor) concession and newly accentuated vulnerability. I might have less difficulty with this tact if it was more finessed; a more Copperfield-esque sleight of hand, but the media, like many, seem to have grown too torpid even for deft subterfuge. That being said, Americans still care, and seem to be, more and more, caring for Bernie Sanders. In the coming weeks I would urge all to be vigilant and cognizant of distraction, because as it stands, the revolution will not be televised.

More from Huffington Post

The Huffington Post
The Huffington Post
image beaconimage beaconimage beacon