Home | About | Donate

An ‘Unqualified’ Success at Media Manipulation


An ‘Unqualified’ Success at Media Manipulation

Robin Andersen

On Tuesday, April 5, Bernie Sanders won the Wisconsin Democratic primary by double digits, and his victory speech ran for half an hour on CNN, a rare media moment when he was able to repeat the issues that have resonated with many Democratic primary voters.


In response to several posters who have insisted that Mr. Sanders POUND Mrs. Clinton with the litany of her failed policies and positions, I recommended that he go gently. I knew the MSM would otherwise have a field day.

So she gets to say that he’s under-qualified and NOT a “real” Democrat; but when he merely counters that false proposition, all Hell breaks loose.

These are such typical examples of the SPIN machine at work:

Huffington Post: “Sanders’ criticisms of Clinton focused on her policy positions, but to many of her supporters they came off as a personal insult…. Especially for many older supporters, they have heard throughout their lives that they’re not as qualified as their male counterparts, and they relate personally to the struggles Clinton has faced.”

"Paul Krugman (New York Times, 4/8/16): “The way Mr. Sanders is now campaigning raises serious character and values issues…. There was Wednesday’s rant about how Mrs. Clinton is not ‘qualified’ to be president…. Is Mr. Sanders positioning himself to join the ‘Bernie or bust’ crowd, walking away if he can’t pull off an extraordinary upset, and possibly helping put Donald Trump or Ted Cruz in the White House?”


Bill Clinton was instrumental to deregulating media so that the result would be total control and ownership by a handful of broadcast corporations.

This is the result and it’s lethal for Democracy. However, it’s perfect if the goal is the manufacture of consent through all sorts of nefarious disinformation campaigns and the marginalization of Truth in almost every important instance:

“But in the aftermath of the Wisconsin win, the media frame was not about Sanders’ momentum, Clinton’s connection to the Panamanian tax haven or, as US Uncut (4/8/16) reported, three major policy wins for Bernie Sanders, but how Sanders had gone negative and was untruthful. It occupied the news cycle for days, knocking out a barrage of bad press that was hobbling her in the run-up to the New York primary.”

So many who read C.D. blame fellow citizens and are completely inured to what lies told often across the public’s media means. THEY blame the victims of mass deception rather than those TRAINED In the Arts of Deception (and well-paid for deploying them)!


This fact is not pointed out often enough.


I do not blame the victims of mass deception as much as their ignorance in allowing the media to manufacture their consent. Ignorance, does not exculpate one from not being facile.


How are people supposed to know they are being lied to and manipulated, unless someone informs them? And if the “informer” has already been marginalized and discredited, they are pissing into the wind. Trust in corporate media personalities has been built up for generations (Ed Murrow, Walter Cronkite, etc.). How’s a farmer in Iowa supposed to know?


Good question. Not unless they are willing to think critically and inform themselves, which with the net is fairly easy. But it is very difficult for someone that has been brainwashed by Fox News and the rest of the corporate media and is too close-minded to realize their thinking has been manipulated by the corporate networks. Excellent question, thanks.