Mainstream Media and Big Tech’s Seismic Shift to the Left
Mainstream Media and Big Tech’s Seismic Shift to the Left
– How it Threatens the Balance of Power in America –
By Robert Basmadjian
Leftism and its big government underpinnings have become systemic in American culture and politics. Freedom of thought, tolerance, and inclusion, once foundational principles of Liberalism, have been hijacked and replaced by suppression, censorship, and vilification of opposing views by the extreme left wing of the Democratic party.
Today, we are also witnessing a seismic shift to the left by the ‘Mainstream Media’ and ‘Big Tech’. It appears these powerful U.S.-based and multinational institutions have colluded to control the flow of news and information Americans consume to advance their Progressive ideology and political agenda. If true, this dramatic shift to the left, threatens the very balance of power in America for generations to come.
The Importance of Maintaining the Balance of Power in Government
No one individual, political party, or political movement has any right or can be trusted with absolute power over the rest of society. It is essential for leaders across America to ensure that the balance of power exists in all spheres of power, particularly the body politic. Otherwise, there is no way to ensure the equal protection of its citizens in the many conflicts and challenges we face as a nation. Therefore, it is important that every individual has the power to keep their ideological and political opponents in check. Over the course of our nation’s history, the balance of power has generally resulted in justice, order, and peace. t is only when one political leader, party and/or institution becomes so powerful, so wealthy, and so influential, that distrust, injustice, and violence become inevitable. Such is the case in most totalitarian forms of government like China and Russia. This model is the antithesis of American self-government, where the U.S. Constitution protects its citizen’s natural rights to life, liberty, and property.
The Power of Information
The futurist, Alvin Toffler— best known for his book “Future Shock” — wrote a book in 1990 entitled “Powershift — Knowledge, Wealth and Violence at the edge of the 21st Century “. In that book, Toffler described three types of power:
Force (physical power) – Most of us learn about force at an early age. Whether it is from parental punishment, bullying, or watching Hollywood movies, we all come to understand that violence, or the threat of violence, is an extremely powerful motivator. The power of force predates civilization, and its unsanctioned use is considered uncivilized.
Wealth (economic power) – Around 600 – 700 BCE, currency was invented as a flexible means of facilitating trade. During this time, currency, or wealth, provided a new type of power — one that could be even more powerful and flexible than force, because it could be used to buy force. Toffler argued that while force is rather individualized, wealth is something that can be accumulated and consolidated. With enough money, one can buy influence, fund a political movement, shape public opinion, and ultimately control the masses.
Knowledge (the power of information) – With the advent of the industrial revolution, Toffler observed a shift from force as the primary type of power in society to wealth as the new and preferred means to exert power.
Following World War II, fueled by the rapid development of communications and information technology and systems, Toffler believes another shift began — from wealth as the primary power to information as the new power of choice.
Dawn of The Information Age and an Increasingly Powerful Media
With the dawn of the ‘Information Age’ came unprecedented advancements in communications and information technology and platforms, most notably the Internet. These technological advancements, combined with the consolidation of power in the news media and information technology (Big Tech) industries, have profoundly changed the way people across America and the globe access, consume and share news and information.
This consolidation of power has given rise to concerns over the power, impact and consequences these institutions have over society at large and specifically, the bias, influence and control they have in shaping public opinion related to government and politics. The news media’s primary duty is to present us with news and information and alert us when important events occur. This information may affect what we think and the actions we take. For these reasons, the integrity and objectivity of the media’s coverage matters.
Bias in media is nothing new. In fact, concerns about the effects of media on voters and the existence and extent of media bias date back to the 1920s. However, the consequences of an increasingly biased media, and now Big Tech, bear serious examination regarding their impact on the political balance of power in America.
Media Bias and Its Impact on Modern Day Politics
The Trump Years: 2016-2020
News coverage of Donald Trump’s Administration, his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement and the 2020 National Election is a prime example of media bias in modern day politics. During this period, unequal treatment of Mr. Trump compared to his political rivals drew increased scrutiny and criticism over the role and impact the Mainstream Media and Big Tech have on government and politics in America. To fully appreciate the level of influence and power these institutions have on American politics, one must first examine the context leading up to the election of Donald John Trump as America’s 45th President in 2016.
Hillary Clinton Email Scandal
For years, if not decades, the Mainstream Media laid the groundwork for the coronation of Hillary Rodham Clinton as America’s first female President. As Former First Lady, New York Senator and Secretary of State for the Obama Administration, Mrs. Clinton was embroiled in a number of political scandals during her career. Most recently, Mrs. Clinton was investigated by the FBI for her use of a private email server to conduct national security business while serving as Secretary of State. Although this type of news would typically garner ‘front page’ headlines, the Mainstream Media minimized and/or suppressed coverage of this ongoing scandal leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Certainly, any news outlet covering this scandal honestly and objectively might run the risk of jeopardizing a historic victory for the former First Lady.
The Russia Collusion Story
In the Fall of 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey unexpectedly announced the reopening of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. His decision became the tipping point for Christopher Steele, an ex-British MI6 officer and Hillary Clinton ally. Fearing the consequences of Director Comey’s announcement, Mr. Steele leaked unverified claims about Donald Trump’s links to Russia to select U.S. news media outlets in October 2016. This opposition research, also known as the ‘Steele Dossier’, served as the basis for securing four FISA warrants and the unprecedented surveillance of a U.S. presidential candidate and his campaign. Equally significant, without verifying the authenticity of the information or its source and sub sources, the Mainstream Media ran with the story, spreading Russian disinformation about then-Republican presidential candidate, Donald Trump. Yet, much to the shock of the Clinton Campaign and the establishment forces that assembled against him, from the world of business to government, Donald J. Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States on November 4, 2016. His unlikely victory represented a powerful rejection of the political establishment, globalization, and multiculturalism by a growing and powerful coalition of working-class Americans disillusioned with their leadership, the direction of their beloved country and promise of the American dream. For Mrs. Clinton, the defeat signaled an astonishing end to her political career. For the establishment, the defeat sparked a rallying cry to delegitimize and sabotage Mr. Trump’s presidency, ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA) movement and its millions of loyal supporters.
Viva la Resistance!
From day one of his Administration, Donald Trump was viewed as a political outsider and threat to the establishment forces who wielded power and influence in the United States and across the globe. Not only was Donald Trump viewed as a threat to the establishment of both political parties and their globalist agenda, but he was also an outspoken critic of the Mainstream Media, highlighting their clear double standard and left-of-center bias. It was this bias that ultimately defined the way President Trump and his MAGA agenda were covered by the Mainstream news media. From the unverified claims in the Steele dossier to the conclusion reached by Robert Mueller that there was no evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump Campaign during the 2016 election, the Mainstream Media served as a gatekeeper of information, selectively filtering and distributing news and information that supported their anti-Trump Russia narrative.
What is most ironic about the way the Mainstream news media framed Mr. Trump’s first presidential campaign, election and presidency is that there was, in fact, Russian collusion. However, it was the Hillary Clinton campaign, not the Donald Trump campaign, that colluded with the Russians! According to recently declassified materials, the Steele dossier was developed by a sub-source with connections to Russian intelligence.
The dossier was paid for by Fusion GPS, on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign and. subsequently leaked by Christopher Steele to help Hillary Clinton overcome her lingering email scandal. Nonetheless, for over two years the Mainstream Media continued to advance the anti-Trump Russian collusion narrative. Only today are we finding out they were simply parroting Democratic talking points.
The 2020 Presidential Campaign
Coverage of the 2020 Presidential Campaign further illustrates the left-of-center bias of the Mainstream Media and the power they wield. More importantly, Big-Tech companies were roundly criticized during this time for their roles in censoring, suppressing and/or de-platforming Conservative voices, news and information outlets. There is no more clear evidence of this than the Hunter Biden Laptop story and how the Mainstream Media and Big Tech may have influenced the outcome of a National Presidential Election.
October Surprise: The Hunter Biden Laptop Story
The term October Surprise was first used in a political context during the 1980 presidential election by William Casey, Ronald Reagan’s campaign manager, according to Smithsonian Magazine. 40 years later, the ‘Hunter Biden Laptop Story’ had all of the markings of an explosive October Surprise during the 2020 presidential campaign. The story, first reported by the New York Post, revolved around emails found on a laptop computer that was dropped off at a computer repair store last April in the state of Delaware. The laptop was traced to Hunter Biden, son of Democratic presidential candidate, Joe Biden.
Emails on the laptop showed that Hunter Biden introduced his father, then-Vice President, to a top executive at a Ukrainian energy firm less than a year before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating the company. Additionally, other stories broke in Conservative news outlets, describing how Hunter Biden and his business associates were aggressively leveraging the Biden family name to make millions from other foreign entities, including China. During the presidential campaign, then-Democratic candidate, Joe Biden, insisted that he had no knowledge of his son’s foreign business dealings. This assertion was later challenged by Tony Bobulinski, former business associate of Hunter Biden.
Surely, a story of this magnitude and consequence would be investigated and covered by the Mainstream Media leading up to the 2020 National election. Instead, all throughout the election cycle, the story was spun as “Russian disinformation”, suppressed, and even censored by the Mainstream Media and Big Tech. What is most disconcerting about all of this is that the Department of Justice confirmed the existence of an ongoing investigation by the FBI of a federal money-laundering probe into Hunter Biden and the Biden family before the election. And yet, the Mainstream Media and Big Tech remained silent.
After an examination of what has transpired the last 4 years, it appears these two powerful institutions have become kingmakers, and even arbiters of truth, colluding to influence the outcomes of two U.S. national presidential elections. The repercussions of such are dangerous and enduring, potentially affecting the balance of power in America for years to come.
Summary
Maintaining the balance of power in government is essential to ensuring a just and peaceful society. Over the course of history, the types of power wielded over individuals has shifted from raw force, to wealth, and now information. Although institutions such as the Mainstream Media and Big Tech were created to provide citizens and voters with objective news and information and public forums to exchange ideas and opinions, these institutions have evolved into left leaning, partisan monopolies. Consolidation and unchecked power of these institutions threatens the balance of power in America. The Mainstream Media and Big Tech’s dramatic shift to the left has stoked feelings of disenfranchisement, distrust, and injustice, contributing to political divide and violence all across America.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Capitalism and Free Market Enterprise to Drive Innovation and Choice
Expecting balance, tolerance, and inclusion of competing thought in today’s Mainstream Media and Big Tech institutions is unrealistic. The power structures at the top are entrenched in their leftist views, and given the current political environment, see little or no reason for change. Furthermore, distrust in Mainstream Media and Big Tech are at an all-time high. In fact, many Americans place the blame squarely on these very institutions for the political divide in our country. That said, there is a tremendous opportunity for conservative-based startups and financiers to build-out competing broadcast media networks, publications, and social media platforms. The digital transformation of the news and media industry essentially leveled the playing field, paving the way for enterprising entrepreneurs to capitalize on a growing and disenfranchised customer base. Those organizations who commit to producing, repurposing, and leveraging credible, high-quality content and programming across a variety of media platforms will stake out a leadership position. It will only be then, when Americans have a choice, that the balance of power can be restored in our country.
Government Oversight to Ensure Decency, Competition and Free Speech
Congressional Reform of Section 230
Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996. The legislation provides technology companies with two important protections. First, it gives them the ability to decide how to moderate third-party content on their computer platforms. Second, unlike traditional publishing companies, it shields them from liability for what their users post. The controversial law has played a significant role in fueling the incredible growth of companies that rely on third-party content like Facebook and Twitter. However, there is a growing consensus from both sides of the political spectrum that the law requires some type of reform. Recently, Section 230 has come under heavy fire from Republicans, who claim Big Tech companies discriminate against conservatives, limiting their freedom of speech protections under the Constitution.
Democrats have also attacked the law, saying it gives the tech companies too much legal protection for hosting harmful content. In 2020, efforts were made by both Democrats and Republicans to reform the legislation. Measured approaches like the Earn It Act and the PACT Act have been debated, receiving bipartisan support. But how would these reforms affect startups and small-to-medium sized businesses, particularly their ability to compete against the Big Tech giants?
The PACT Act, co-sponsored by senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and John Thune (R-North Dakota), would require online platforms to remove content in certain cases, such as when served with a court order. It includes some rule exemptions for platforms that generate less than $25 million in annual revenue and attract fewer than one million monthly active users. Although the exemptions have been written with competition in mind, opponents contend that it does not go far enough. They argue startups and small firms simply do not have the financial resources to meet new regulations or take on the burden of liability for their user content.
There’s also criticism of the Earn It Act, which would amend Section 230 to hold tech companies liable for acts of child sex exploitation that occur on their platforms. Opponents of this act argue moderating content to comply with the measure would be far too expensive and onerous for small companies. Regardless which option is pursued, the hope is that now that the 2020 election is behind us, Congress will work toward compromise, taking the time necessary to craft legislation that addresses both parties’ concerns, while promoting innovation, free market competition, and consumer choice.
This is an op-ed article and are not necessarily the views of Conservative News Daily
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
