Home | About | Donate

Establishment Media and the Green New Deal: New Wine in Old Bottles

Establishment Media and the Green New Deal: New Wine in Old Bottles

Miranda Spencer

Freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (known as AOC) and veteran Sen. Ed Markey on February 7 introduced HR 109, a sweeping mission statement for aggressively tackling climate change by jump-starting an equitable socio-economic transition. While the resolution was a radical departure from politics as usual, most corporate media filtered coverage of the “Green New Deal” (GND) through the lens of conventional expectations.

For those of you who think this is a damnocrat brainstorm:

1 Like

Per Yale and George Mason universities—81% of voters , both Dems and Gopers support the Green New Deal—so maybe Mitch, you should pay attention. So, elected politicians, the citizens can see the coming terror of climate change, and what it can do to all people and the planet. Listen to science—not the lobbyists.

It is probably a very good thing that articles be written and published pointing out the general collapse of “the establishment media.” the commercial news media, or what was the “major news media.”

That collapse has been in evidence for nearly three decades now, conservatively, and has been mostly completed for over a decade. The shift is pretty straightforward, and can be relevantly described using Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky’s five filters from Manufacturing Consent.

These were as follows:

  • Owners (nothing published they don’t want)
  • Advertisers (primary source of money, so not to be offended)
  • Sources (sources of information)
  • Audience (whose attention owners sell to advertisers)
  • Ideology (the reigning and little-examined background assumptions of all of the above)

Essentially, as types of media subdivided through the 1990s and CNN cut a deal with the MIC to embed reporters for war footage, the old model of news died, and the old academic model of the “good source” determined by institutional prestige died as well. Owners cut deals with sources and advertisers to create content for audiences.

Of course, this was not unknown previously by any means. But with increased competition from new and superior media, it became the one way that large news corporations in the USA could function. The CIA, the DNC, Monsanto, et al rushed to fill the gap and project the images that they preferred.

To make a before | after comparison, papers debated a good deal internally before publishing The Pengagon Papers or news of the Watergate break-in. But these large commercial entities finally decided that they could not afford to be scooped by whatever sources would release these because their business depended on some level of Audience faith in their integrity. Without that, they could not sell audience attention to advertisers to support owners. By 2003,. the NYT and other nominal sources refused to report the news that there were no WMD’s in Iraq, although this had long been obvious and even extensively documented in Pacific Radio reporting leading up to the invasion and for a good time after. There were some voices pro and contra, but the decisions each fell towards silence and propaganda.

There have been other similar and obvious mission-critical failures, including the general failure to support news sources that worked independently or contradicted their usual government and large corporate sources–these included whistleblowers in general, and the journalists who worked with them, most notably Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, Julian Assange, Reality Winner, and John Kiriakou, though there are considerable others, most of whom have managed to remain anonymous.

By 2015 and 2016, we have extensively documented collusion of the major media in the nomination and election processes, working on behalf of governmental and paragovernmental agencies–an essentially complete collapse of the 4th estate.

Academia being what it is and what is has been, there has as yet been little if any change in the the training of students in writing and critical thinking to accord with the great sea change of institutional circumstance. Academics do have some freedom to make this change. They–or we, insofar as I might someday return to a course in a relevant area–need to point out that our old institutional model of documenting authoritative information is no longer workable.

Students need to be encouraged to avoid relying on sources like WaPo, the NYT, and so forth, since these have largely become masks for government and money.

Sorry, stardust, but cash is king to the 90% +/- scum in D.C. To them the buck will ALWAYS beat out Soul, compassion, and DUTY.

Cash is also king to academia…groveling for research grants from special interests so their research scams continue ala Machiavelli.

So sad that so many people don’t get it.

Where is FDR when we need him?

yuppers… but boy do the rest of the 99% outnumber them by a loooong shot. Its going to be an equally loooong fight.