I am not a populist, writes Frank Giustra, nor do I buy into the conspiracy theories of some candidates. But it’s crucial to hear these voices directly, without a biased filter. “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”
— George Orwell
Election season in the U.S. (https://thestar.com/news/world/us-election/) exemplifies how far the mainstream media has strayed from its mandate to inform and educate.
Like him or not, Robert Kennedy Jr.’s exclusion from CNN’s recent presidential debate, despite the global importance of this election, highlights this issue. It is widely assumed CNN made this decision in collusion with the two main political parties. But CNN’s actions are not isolated and underscore how established media outlets fail to cover America’s real political, economic and social problems in a nuanced manner. RFK Jr.’s rising poll numbers concern both Republicans and Democrats, as he appears to attract votes from both sides. While it’s understandable that they would try to block him, why is the mainstream media complicit?
One possible answer lies in RFK Jr.’s campaign platform. Often ridiculed for his views, he addresses important issues like the crippling federal debt, the corrupt merger of state and corporate power, the wealth gap, the chronic disease epidemic, and the broken health-care system — all of which affect Americans. He prioritizes these over divisive cultural issues.
He tackles the crisis of trust in institutions and leaders that is gripping America. Yes, he has expressed problematic views on vaccines and other topics that are not evidence based, but so have the other candidates whose voices are heard.
Mainstream media is often considered corporate-friendly due to its heavy reliance on advertising revenue. When your advertisers include pharmaceutical and food companies, defence contractors and financial institutions, addressing critical issues could be seen as corporate suicide. As Noam Chomsky put it, the media often serves as a tool for “manufacturing consent,” rather than fostering informed public discourse. He emphasized that certain topics are confined within allowable boundaries set by powerful institutions, limiting the range of acceptable discussion.
Given this reality, where can one find news, facts and opinions free from corporate influence? A potential answer is the shift in tone from former mainstream media personalities who have left networks like CNN, Fox and MSNBC. Many of these individuals are now reporting from independent online platforms, where they may have more freedom to express their views. I spend significant time listening to podcasts from all political sides. Former cable TV personalities like Fox’s Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, CNN’s Chris Cuomo, and MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan are now expressing views they would never have aired under corporate influence. Freed from those constraints, they discuss sensitive topics such as American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s influence on American foreign policy, the media’s cosy relationship with big corporations, the role of media in fostering cultural animosity, and the reasons behind America’s seemingly endless wars.
These online platforms significantly impact mainstream media viewership. Consider Joe Rogan, the king of online podcasts. With an average of 11 million daily viewers, he surpasses the combined viewership of all mainstream news talk shows. While he delves into wacky topics and conspiracy theories, he also fearlessly addresses “no-go” subjects ignored by CNN and Fox.
While at Fox, Tucker Carlson averaged of 3.4 million daily viewers. Since his firing and move to X (formerly Twitter), his viewership has increased substantially, with his first three episodes averaging 19.3 million views. Carlson has noticeably transformed since leaving Fox. I have never been a fan of Carlson, but lately he comes across as more likeable and humbler and is now critical of the mainstream media, especially regarding American hawks and their endless warmongering. And it’s not just RFK Jr. or conservative-populists like Carlson whose voices are muted; even opinions from the likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) and the democratic left in America are rarely heard on CNN or Fox.
If there is one platform that unsettles the establishment, it’s TikTok. With 127 million U.S. users and as the preferred news source for generation Z, it has captured the attention of politicians from both sides of the aisle. Despite the ACLU asserting that banning TikTok would violate the First Amendment, Congress shows broad bipartisan support to either force a sale or ban it entirely due to its China connections and national security issues. However, some argue that China isn’t the primary issue behind this potential ban. For instance, recent college protests calling for a ceasefire in Gaza gained traction through TikTok. Views on Israel-Gaza are significantly divided by age demographics, with 18–24-year-olds more in favour of a ceasefire than older groups.
Whether it’s Gaza or Ukraine, the mainstream media seems completely divorced from the nuance associated with these conflicts and most never talk about peaceful solutions in spite of the difficult compromises any solution would entail. This trend has not gone unnoticed by the political class.
In a recent Sedona Forum conversation between Sen. Mitt Romney and U.S. secretary of state Antony Blinken on the narrative of Israel’s war in Gaza, Romney remarked: “Typically, the Israelis are good at PR — what’s happened here?” Blinken offered as one reason the “intravenous” feeds of perpetual news. “You have a social media ecosystem environment in which context, history, facts get lost and the emotion, the impact of images dominates … and it has a very challenging impact on the narrative.”
Romney added: “Some wonder why there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down potentially TikTok or other entities of that nature. If you look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians relative to other social media sites, it’s overwhelmingly so among TikTok broadcasts.”
Political opinions are a personal choice. I am not advocating for the left or the right. Nor am I a populist or prone to buying into the conspiracy theories of some of the above-mentioned candidates or media personalities. But whether or not you agree with the diagnosis of the nonmainstream voices regarding the current situation, and especially their prescription of what’s required to address America’s myriad problems, it’s crucial to hear these voices directly, without a biased filter.
Personally, I’m fortunate to have the time to explore various news platforms online, allowing me to sift through data and verify what appears closest to the truth. Unfortunately, many Americans lack this luxury and rely on mainstream echo chambers, leaving them misinformed, angry and beholden to prevailing dogmas.
Until a media platform emerges that thoroughly sifts through all the news to present facts that more accurately represent reality, consume your daily media menu with a grain of salt.
