Here’s a Doonesbury cartoon by Garry Trudeau from 1974:
Things never change, do they—or do they? In 1974, of course, there was an expectation that if Richard Nixon were impeached and put on trial in the Senate, there was a chance that at least some Republicans would vote to remove him from office—which is why Nixon resigned when it looked like impeachment and a Senate trial were a certainty.
In 2019, of course, few see any likelihood at all that a Republican-dominated Senate would ever vote Trump out of office, regardless of what charges the House might impeach him with—even if he knocked over a bank, say, or shot the proverbial “somebody on Fifth Avenue.”
Roger Ailes (cc photo: US Army/Christopher Tobey)
What’s changed between 1974 and 2019? The biggest transformation was the realization of the longstanding Republican dream—perhaps first articulated in a memo drafted by Roger Ailes for the Nixon White House (Gawker, 6/30/11)—of a right-wing media network that would do an end-run around what was seen as a media establishment hostile to the GOP: “It avoids the censorship, the priorities and the prejudices of network news selectors and disseminators,” Ailes’ GOP TV proposal promised.
The idea that the media establishment was inherently hostile to Republicans was largely a delusion; newspapers endorsed Nixon over Democratic challenger George McGovern 753 to 56, after all. But merely not having the selling of conservative policies as their primary motivation made corporate media an obstacle and therefore an enemy—and Ailes worked tirelessly to create a parallel media system that would deliver the news as the right wing wants it to be seen—”The Way Things Ought to Be,” as the title of a book by Ailes protege Rush Limbaugh put it.
The main value of Fox News, the cable behemoth launched by Ailes on behalf of right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch, is that it teaches conservative viewers that no facts or logic can force them to believe anything they don’t want to believe. Much as the tobacco and fossil fuel industries created their own realms of pseudo-scholarship where smoking doesn’t cause lung cancer and greenhouse gasses don’t warm the planet, Fox creates a parallel universe where conservatives are always victims, never villains, and any evidence to the contrary is simply—as the shopworn saying goes—”fake news.”
The corporate media establishment is devoted to the peculiar notion of “objectivity” (FAIR.org, 7/20/12)—which, somewhat counterintuitively, rejects the idea that there is an objective reality that journalists can meaningfully describe, and instead limits reporters’ role to repeating claims made about reality by various sources. On matters of national importance, these sources mostly consist of powerful government officials, including representatives of the major opposition party. This system allows reality as described in the most prestigious media outlets to be defined by the leadership of the two-party establishment—which turned out to be a good recipe for a stable, self-sustaining political class (one whose policy proposals could be counted on not to threaten the profits of media owners or sponsors).
Stable, that is, until one party figures out that the system allows them to say whatever they want. The rise of the right-wing media machine allowed Republicans to create their own self-serving fantasy world—and the rules of the centrist establishment meant that that bizarro version had to be incorporated into the consensus media reality. When the president is accused of a crime, he need not disprove the allegations, but merely needs to put forward a version of events in which he is the one fighting crime, and his accuser a traitor working on behalf of a shadowy cabal. This becomes the unquestioned reality of the right-wing parallel universe—and an on-the-other-hand option offered by the centrist press.
Living the dream
In a nightmare
Thank you, Doug Latimer—that is a perfect comment on America today.
If you have to go back to 1972 to prove that there was no hostility to Conservatives that created a market opportunity for FOX well … perhaps you need to re-think that a little.
On a more serious note … “Fox creates a parallel universe where conservatives are always victims, never villains”.
This exactly represents the information war that the power hungry, warmongers in our govt and their minions like Sean Hannity project about the U.S.
We starve and brutalize much weaker countries like Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, Yemen, and Iran, countries which have never harmed us (especially the first four, we are conditioned to overreact to Iran) yet we act as if we are on the brink of ruin. ‘If we don’t stand up to the evil of our day then the world will be overrun by tyrants and take away our way of life’.
BTW I’m an anti-war, anti-U.S. aggression Republican, I want Bernie but I’ll settle for Warren. Not starving Yemenis anymore is more important to me than a slightly lower tax rate.
I agree with much of your reply even though you felt as though you were obliged to add that disclaimer about “the first 4 countries” which of course you then followed up with “..even Iran” but that’s not my main issue.
“Yet we act as if we are on the brink of ruin…” however, is an ancient white/western supremacist ploy used to justify slavery, the refusal to end it, the rape and pillage of Native American peoples, the sacking of “Black Wall Street” and too many other white Christian conservative crimes throughout the history of this country. It’s what happened with communism (both at home and abroad – Vietnam anyone? Joseph McCarthy? Hoover? the Kennedy assassination?) and drugs and homosexual marriage/rights, the end of segregation, the current immigration situation, etc.
IOW, it’s a time-worn conservative ploy to scare whites – especially lower middle class and poor working class – into embracing any number of racist, aggressive, political policies that were adopted by the Republicans in the 1960s and 70s. So while I am not trying to imply some sort of purity requirement, I just can’t imagine how any free thinking, concerned with justice for all (not just for some) and otherwise educated commenter like yourself could ever have voted in good faith for Republicans during any of our lifetimes. (this entire comment is ignoring the hypocrisy and corruption at the heart of the democratic party in various state and federal manifestations, so don’t think I’m giving them a pass here.)
The writer goes back to the McGovern-Nixon election run in an attempt to debunk the idea that the establishment is “inherently hostile” to Republicans.” But we are not living in 1974. Today there is a substantial establishment media hostile to Republicans. MSNBC and CNN perform for Democrats the same function as Fox for Republicans, i.e., create a fantasy world that encorages the viewers’ prejudices.
It’s interesting how the media representing the DNC – your MSNBC’s and CNN’s – will rail day and night against Donald Trump’s latest tweets, his attacks on the democratic establishment favorites like Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren, and the Donald’s all in all cretin behavior.
But when President Trump threatens and bullies and sanctions the Irans and Venezuelas of the world, sends more troops to Afghanistan, calls for the extradition to the US of Julian Assange and the lock-up of Chelsea Manning, bombs Syria, gives the biggest tax cut to the wealthy in history, marches troops and installs missiles right up to Russia’s border, cheers on Israeli apartheid in Palestine, and supports the medieval Saudi’s crushing of hapless Yemen – all we hear are crickets from the ‘mainstream media’.
MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times and Washington Post are owned and funded by the same corporate elites that own Donald Trump. In matters that truly count – money, power and control, both teams – red and blue – are on the same side. The endless bickering over impeachment and Trump tweets is just a sideshow for us prols, a deflection from what really matters to the oligarchs running this Kabuki Theater. It isn’t left versus right, it is the top versus everyone else.
Your use of ‘centrist’ drives me batty. The neoliberal corporate media cannot be ‘centrist’ unless one believes deregulation, privatization and outsourcing are centrist endeavors. The same applies to so-called centrist (i.e. right wing) Democrats.
Michael Parenti dubbed these folks “extreme moderates” and then more recently Tariq Ali dubbed them the “extreme centre”.
The theoretical premise of this article is that of left populism, as if that is a theoretically sound and entirely apolitical viewpoint. As Rex Butler put it, “in the analysis of ideology, it is not simply a matter of seeing which account of reality best matches the ‘facts’, with the one that is closest being the least biased and therefore the best. As soon as the facts are determined, we have already — whether we know it or not — made our choice; we are already within one ideological system or another. The real dispute has already taken place over what is to count as the facts, which facts are relevant, and so on.” This insight does not apply merely to Fox News, the GOP, or the political right more generally. I applies to the center, the left…and FAIR. Although he states it in the most confused prose possible (“The corporate media establishment is devoted to the peculiar notion of ‘objectivity’ (FAIR.org, 7/20/12)—which, somewhat counterintuitively, rejects the idea that there is an objective reality that journalists can meaningfully describe, and instead limits reporters’ role to repeating claims made about reality by various sources.”), Naureckas clearly endorses the idea of “objective” journalism, something that has been debunked by philosophers and psychoanalysts. Could it be that the “corporate media establishment” is (*gasp*) correct here, or at least not entirely wrong? Obviously, the corporate media misuse this kernel of truth to promote a might-leaning Manichean worldview. But the point is that there is no objective, neutral position with which to assess the politicization of journalism–this is only possible from the standpoint of some political framework or another. Once again Naureckas, left populism is NOT “objective”!
The entire article ignores that the media deregulation which allows a nonstop, unchallenged flow of right-wing, pro-corporate propaganda to permeate our lives was initiated by Bill Clinton.
And it also ignores that MSDNC, which passes for a “liberal” challenge to Fox and rightist radio, has moved to the Right of those swill-sayers when it comes to Foreign Policy and the MIC’s role in the devolution of Amerikan society..
Indeed, Tucker fscking Carlson has done more to challenge the suicidal madness of Russiagate and US wars of aggression than all the war parrots on MSDNC combined. That the author dares mention a right-wing parallel universe while only attacking only one wing of the War Party would be hilarious, were it not so tragic
“When the president is accused of a crime, he need not disprove the allegations…” Does this mean the legal standard of the ‘presumption of innocence’ no longer applies or is it merely in suspension for Trump & #MeToo? Mueller’s deconstruction of the ‘Russiagate’ allegations confirms the need to suspend lynching until there’s actual evidence to support it. The new ‘Ukraingate’ allegations seem very reminiscent of ‘Russiagate’… same accusers too.
I have yet to see anything on this website that represents truth and fairness in news. You’re obviously extremely liberal and you’ve definitely jumped on the msm bandwagon. I actually research to find facts and honestly have found fox to be more accurate but none of them are. Bias should be something that doesn’t show in true journalism. I thought that was what your site was about but I guess not. It’s a shame because we could use some truth without having to spend hours finding it. We thought that’s’ what you were doing but you aren’t. Disappointing.
Couldn’t have said it better
Nice to see an old Doonesbury comic strip referenced for this article. Doonesbury is one of the greatest strips of all time! I still read it every single day.
This was very nicely and clearly laid out. Newscorp lost money the first 10 years of its existence I read somewhere, and this explains that anomaly. The worst part is that we are just beginning to suffer the consequences.