Have you been following Wikileaks’ release of e-mails to and from
Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta? Interesting items come out in
dribs and drabs, mostly ignored by big media outlets. It could be argued there
isn’t much news in them.
If you didn’t realize the Democrats have chummy relationships with
the media, didn’t realize Hillary is as two-faced as a newspaper management
type, didn’t realize she treats ordinary Americans with contempt, didn’t
realize her people fret endlessly about her husband’s sex life and the sleazy
doings of the Clinton Foundation, you haven’t been paying attention. Maybe
you’ve been determined not to.
The Clinton camp has made ineffectual stabs at trying to discredit
this massive leak, insinuating that some of the e-mails are fake (they aren’t)
or that Russian hackers are behind them. Nothing sticks, mostly because
Wikileaks has won journalism awards in its 10-year history. Clinton flack Brian
Fallon even tweeted:
If you are going to write about materials issued by @wikileaks, you should at least state they are product of illegal hack by a foreign govt— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) October 11, 2016
Since their lies aren’t flying, Clinton defenders must count on
their operatives in the media playing defense. There are indications that no
dissent will be tolerated by the elites, with Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs the
outliers. (My post-election prediction: Sean makes good on his threat to move
to Texas, concentrating on radio, and Dobbs, in disgust, retires again.)
There are consequences to all this, as Glen Greenwald points out
at The Intercept:
“While Donald Trump’s candidacy poses grave dangers, so doesgroup-think righteousness, particularly when it engulfs those with the greatestinfluence. The problem is that none of this is going to vanish after theelection. This election-year machine that has been constructed based on eliteutility in support of Clinton – casually dismissing inconvenient facts asfraudulent to make them disappear, branding critics and adversaries as tools oragents of an enemy power bent on destroying America – is a powerful one. … Itis capable of implanting any narrative; no matter how false; demonizing anycritic, no matter how baseless; and riling up people to believe they’re underattack.”
Of course, it
remains to be seen whether “those with the greatest influence” actually have
it. It is interesting that of the top 100 newspapers, not a single one endorsed
Trump. Some sat out; many of the Hillary endorsements were lukewarm. Whether
newspapers’ editorial boards retain any influence is an open question. Since
they won’t consider any opinions not embraced by leftists, my take is that they
will change minds by the handful and lose readers by the boatload, exacerbating
prevailing trends in a business long bent on committing suicide.
No comments:
Post a Comment