Home | About | Donate

Why the Major Media Marginalize Sanders


Why the Major Media Marginalize Sanders

Robert Reich

“Bernie did well last weekend but he can’t possibly win the nomination,” a friend told me for what seemed like the thousandth time, attaching an article from the Washington Post that shows how far behind Bernie remains in delegates.


What is NPR's excuse for helping Hillary then because they sure have been doing that in their unofficial but plainly obvious 'snide slide from the inside' for Hillary.


It's much worse than that, Dr. Reich, they marginalize their audience as well. I still believe that they have marching orders to censor Bernie's message. Whether it is a conspiracy brought about in smoke-filled rooms or the bubble effect you suggest that produces a "peer pressure" to form the public mind no longer matters. M$M is a big club, as George Carlin would say, and you and I ain't in it.


Listening to NPR in 2016?
I am sure they put out some information that is invaluable, and reporting with their resources as only they can do.

But their fascist bent in every other line is just too much for me to take anymore.


Reich writes "they (media) wouldn't dare try (a conspiracy), if the public stops trusting them their brands are worth nothing".

Reich needs to look at the mainstream media's (print and broadcast) downward trending numbers of Murkin audiences during the past decade plus. Although the media makes excuses about new technology drawing audiences away, the media's selective and slanted coverage has driven away more of their former audience.

Much of the public HAS stopped trusting them and their brands are more and more dependent on more and more funding from the 1%.


NPR 2016:

"This program was sponsored by BAE..."

"Citing a study performed by the CATO Institute..."


"Oh, and you have the chance to win an 'Ask Me Another' Rubik's cube..."

This is not what my mother fought for in the 1960's!


It has nothing to do with the media being owned by oligarchs? It has nothing to do with Bernie running against corporate welfare, and the mainstream media being on the receiving end? It has nothing to do with Wall Street? I'm just testing this site out for honest news, this is either being very naive or you're straight up lying. The owners will be TAXED once Bernie is POTUS, but that has nothing to do with it! I was born, but not yesterday! The owners of the media don't want Bernie, that's fact. Proof? The showed an empty Trump pulpit while Bernie was having one of his biggest speeches on corporate welfare, coincidence? I think not!


"Some Sanders supporters speak in dark tones about a media conspiracy against Bernie. That’s baloney. The mainstream media are incapable of conspiring with anyone or anything. They wouldn’t dare try. Their reputations are on the line. If the public stops trusting them, their brands are worth nothing."

No conspiracy?

That's like saying that companies in the same industry aren't conspiring to set prices, they just happen to all have the same price.

And if the NYT is acting independently from the Washington Post is irrelevant in terms of behavior, they both have the same negative attitude about Bernie.

"If the public stops trusting them, their brands are worth nothing."

If that were the case Judith Miller's parroting of lies about Iraq's WMDs would have put the NYT out of business.

MSM has a definite anti-Bernie slant. They have begrudgingly given him very limited coverage, the vast majority of which is derogatory. If it isn't a conspiracy it's the result of a viewpoint so pervasive it blinds them to what's actually going on.

Not a good quality in organizations who are supposed to be reporting, not creating, the news.


Stick around. Many commenters here are not as naive and as mainstream as Robert Reich. Even Mr. Reich himself has better moments than displayed in this one article.


"Some Sanders supporters speak in dark tones about a media conspiracy against Bernie."

The term "conspiracy" is used too often by people, including Reich and even yours truly. Let's be clear; it's not a conspiracy, it's "business". Six corporate heads don't have to meet secretly and plot an agenda. They already know the agenda and it is a business agenda to keep what they have and get more. And More is never enough. Senator Sanders might get in the way of that business agenda.



If it walks like a conspiracy, if it talks like a conspiracy, it is a conspiracy! It doesn't have to be a group of men in trenchcoats meeting in an underground garage surrounded by heavies in black homburgs, no it is more subtle than that, for example, during the brief coverage CNN gave to the Saturday primaries, whenever it showed a graphic of the count, below on another line it listed HIlllary's delegate count including superdelegates. Examples are endless, conspiracy?, the conspiracy of the like minded.


NPR is a valuable resource for foreign news and events as well as a unifying cultural force for the nation. That said... NPR has become a political fifth column for oligarchy. It subverts the principles of fair play and even free speech by its biases on political coverage. That is depressing.

By manifesting a direct political bias it loses that universality that was an inherent ideal of public broadcasting. They also choose oligarchy by omission (so to speak) by not speaking of the connections that extend throughout our system although they will mention that the Koch brothers spend money on elections and so forth. They leave out the details though.


I have appreciated many of Mr. Reich's efforts over the years, but I think he missed the mark on this one, in at least two places:

First, when he wrote

The mainstream media are incapable of conspiring with anyone or anything. They wouldn’t dare try. Their reputations are on the line. If the public stops trusting them, their brands are worth nothing.

IMO, so much of the kerfuffle around the current election cycle is precisely that the public has already stopped trusting them.

I also think Mr. Reich soft-pedals reality with this:

In addition, because the major media depend on the wealthy and powerful for revenues, because their reporters and columnists rely on the establishment for news and access, because their top media personalities socialize with the rich and powerful and are themselves rich and powerful, and because their publishers and senior executives are themselves part of the establishment, the major media have come to see much of America through the eyes of the establishment.

I agree with that list of causes, but the effect is far worse than Mr. Reich acknowledges. To the previous paragraph I would append this:

They are incapable of reflecting any other perspective, even (especially) when such alternative viewpoints rise to a life-and-death level of importance. What that really means is that they no longer function as media - as we popularly construe the word - at all. Quite the opposite: now they vigorously resist the exposure of other outlooks.

This is hardly new. Robert McChesney published the seminal Rich Media, Poor Democracy in 1999. Read Kristina Borjesson (ed.), Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press (2002) for essays about journalistic suppression by a number of (mostly former) reporters.

What does appear to be new is the degree to which the public has dismissed the major media as irrelevant.


Nice comment. Though I think progressives are more aware of the effects and guard against them while the average public is mostly only aware that they shouldn't believe everything that they hear kind of thing. The public is only just starting to seriously feel manipulated but most people aren't skilled at seeing how it is being done.


WTF? It is a conspiracy...a conspiracy of silence. They do it all the time.

Either RR is completely stupid or he wrote those words tongue-in-cheek. I'm hoping it was the latter.


Uh oh...I think I dated your mom?

It was what we fought. It was worse in some ways way back when as Edward R Murrow knew. But we had Cronkite and there was this honor among thieves ...I mean among the press that you went for the high road and avoided being a paid hack or a spineless toady ( many an NPR reporter seems looking over their shoulders at somebody saying >>> "Look see? I'm going along with the help Hillary Mafia too!)

When did the broadcasting community of Americans dispose of the right to freedom of the press simply to further their personal careers?

Someone alert the media that the media is betraying our right to a free press.


They are probably looking back at 2008 when Clinton was behind Obama by a smaller margin and even though she was winning primaries she still could not catch him. Clinton actually got more total votes than Obama and still lost because she did the best in primaries where more people vote and he did the best in caucus states where fewer people vote. Until someone can come from pretty far behind in the Democratic primaries and win the MSM will probably not give whomever is trailing much chance.


The conspiracy of greed. The one guaranteed conspiracy open to all without prior registration or participation. The media is not a low wage job. Plus there is a thrill to manipulating opinion like do advertisers and politicians do. media consolidation and the shake downs of press rooms and news desks have left true liberals and progressives in short supply in the mainstreaming media.

Sure it is an owned media now, that is the truth but individuals aren't told outright to write this or say that. They just don't get promoted if they do or don't. They get demoted and fired like did Phil Donohue and shows get cancelled if they cross the unspoken line (that everyone talks about when outside of work but which is never talked about or confronted at work).


Hmm,sounds like something I heard a pundit say on one of the Sunday Morning News shows, " If Bernie Sanders keeps winning states he better be careful he just might win the nomination". He was sarcastically referring to his fellow pundits on the panel ignoring Bernie's success thus far.
Their continued attempt to marginalize Bernie just makes his supporters all the more determined and goes perhaps to the heart of the problem they are trying to change.
We the people are the democracy no matter what your money and power might think and believe otherwise and we are out to prove it.
Thank you Bernie Sanders for being the vehicle for a change that is way over do.
Here is to single payer healthcare and tuition free public university and college educations for our children and grandchildren.
As they say in state of Vermont, "GIVE THEM HELL BERNIE".


Nevertheless the media has a big effect as is shown by how many older folks in the black community side with Clinton even though they have spent their lives bemoaning the fact that education opportunities were segregated first by race and then by economics yet ignore Bernie 's plan to provide all Americans with a free college education. What is that about?

To get minorities and the poor (especially poor folks in black communities who suffered from unfair access to higher education) to ignore free college educations is bizarre and the direct result of the media manipulation and rigging the game against Bernie. America's media is throwing the baby out with the bath water since these people are smart enough to know that the surest way to alleviate poverty is to give poor people an equal education to wealthier people.