RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Reich writes: "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. The real reason the major media can't see what's happening is because the national media exist inside the bubble of establishment politics, centered in Washington, and the bubble of establishment power, centered in New York."

Robert Reich. (photo: Jim Wilson/The New York Times)
Robert Reich. (photo: Jim Wilson/The New York Times)

Why the Major Media Marginalize Bernie

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

31 March 16


ernie 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.

Wait a minute. Last Tuesday, Sanders won 78 percent of the vote in Idaho and 79 percent in Utah. This past Saturday, he took 82 percent of the vote in Alaska, 73 percent in Washington, and 70 percent in Hawaii.

In fact, since March 15, Bernie has won six out of the seven Democratic primary contests with an average margin of victory of 40 points. Those victories have given him roughly a one hundred additional pledged delegates.

As of now, Hillary Clinton has 54.9 percent of the pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders’s 45.1 percent.That’s still a sizable gap – but it doesn’t make Bernie an impossibility.

Moreover, there are 22 states to go with nearly 45 percent of pledged delegates still up for grabs – and Bernie has positive momentum in almost all of them.

Hillary Clinton’s lead in superdelegates will vanish if Bernie gains a majority of pledged delegates.

Bernie is outpacing Hillary Clinton in fundraising. In February, he raised $42 million (from 1.4 million contributions, averaging $30 each), compared to her $30 million. In January he raised $20 million to her $15 million.

By any measure, the enthusiasm for Bernie is huge and keeps growing. He’s packing stadiums, young people are flocking to volunteer, support is rising among the middle-aged and boomers.

In Idaho and Alaska he exceeded the record primary turnout in 2008, bringing thousands of new voters. He did the same thing in Colorado, Kansas, Maine, and Michigan as well.

Yet if you read the Washington Post or the New York Times, or watch CNN or even MSNBC, or listen to the major pollsters and pundits, you’d come to the same conclusion as my friend. Every success by Bernie is met with a story or column or talking head whose message is “but he can’t possibly win.”

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.

The real reason the major media can’t see what’s happening is because the national media exist inside the bubble of establishment politics, centered in Washington, and the bubble of establishment power, centered in New York.

As such, the major national media are interested mainly in personalities and in the money behind the personalities. Political reporting is dominated by stories about the quirks and foibles of the candidates, and about the people and resources behind them.

Within this frame of reference, it seems nonsensical that a 74-year-old Jew from Vermont, originally from Brooklyn, who calls himself a Democratic socialist, who’s not a Democratic insider and wasn’t even a member of the Democratic Party until recently, who has never been a fixture in the Washington or Manhattan circles of power and influence, and who has no major backers among the political or corporate or Wall Street elites of America, could possibly win the nomination.

But precisely because the major media are habituated to paying attention to personalities, they haven’t been attending to Bernie’s message – or to its resonance among Democratic and independent voters (as well as many Republicans). The major media don’t know how to report on movements.

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.

So it’s understandable, even if unjustifiable, that the major media haven’t noticed how determined Americans are to reverse the increasing concentration of wealth and political power that have been eroding our economy and democracy. And it’s understandable, even if unjustifiable, that they continue to marginalize Bernie Sanders. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+143 # Moxa 2016-03-31 12:23
I suspect it is darker than that. I think it really is intentional. The media are corporate and Bernie is not a friend of the coporatocracy. He is a threat to them. While it is true they are in the mindset of the establishment, they aren't uniformly stupid; and given it is their job to report the news, they must know at least as much as the average person, who understands that Bernie is a force of nature and the most popular politician in the country.
+80 # Vardoz 2016-03-31 18:34
HRC is the corporate media's sweetheart because they know she is in bed with the status quo and the current corporate Oligarchy.
+76 # lfeuille 2016-03-31 19:10
I agree. It can be intentional without being a conspiracy. They all have the same interests which he threatens. They act individually to the same end.
+6 # DaveEwoldt 2016-04-01 20:45
Yeah. What I keep telling people is that it's not a conspiracy, it's a philosophy.

To me, the end goal of movement building is paradigm shift.
+2 # lfeuille 2016-04-03 00:18
OK, except calling it a philosophy makes it sound too high minded. It is a philosophy created, consciously or unconsciously, to justify economic inequality.
+47 # economagic 2016-03-31 19:17
"While it is true they are in the mindset of the establishment, they aren't uniformly stupid"

Definitely not, but learned ignorance is almost as dense a shield!
+15 # Adoregon 2016-04-01 13:04
Robert Reich, your premise is wrong. The major media know exactly what they are doing vis a vis Bernie and Hillary.

Upton Sinclair nailed it in this quotation:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

All the major media are part of vertical hierarchies. The who, what and why is dictated top down.
+8 # dickbd 2016-04-01 14:44
I've always liked the Sinclair quote, as it explains a lot of baffling phenomena in the news media.

And I agree with you about the major media.
+152 # grandlakeguy 2016-03-31 13:41
Dear Mr. Reich, I must respectfully disagree with your conclusion that the MSM cannot see what is going on with Bernie's political revolution. They see it and it threatens and terrifies them!
When they constantly under report the size of crowds at his public appearances, grant him noticeably less coverage on his issues and even pull insulting stunts such as cut away from a Sanders primary victory speech to go to an empty podium in Trump's home and wait ten minutes while breathlessly anticipating his arrival it shows their appalling bias.
The truth of the matter is that the media outlets are owned by huge corporations (NBC is owned by General Electric for example, and a President that would take us to peace with other nations would be TERRIBLE for war profiteering from their armament business) and Bernie Sanders is a threat to their interests just as he is terrifying to the DNC and their Republican light elite such as Debbie Wasserman Schultz!
With Hillary as the winner they know that they are absolutely safe from any change in the status quo.
They are painfully aware that the more that the American people learn about Bernie, and his 30 year record of loudly stating the same principles, the stronger his support grows in every category of voters.
That said, Mr. Reich I thoroughly enjoy your writing and urge you to keep it up!
+17 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-03-31 23:42
Msm is part of the fascist system. 6 companies own all the major media. They know where their corporate bread is buttered.

Oh and the CIA sometimes pays them to say what the CIA wants them to say. This article has a link to a video of a German reporter saying just that.
-1 # Adoregon 2016-04-01 13:21
RTFO grandlakeguy
+78 # tswhiskers 2016-03-31 13:46
Yes, indeed. The Establishment Media are as much part of the D.C. Establishment as is the 2-party system. No need for outsiders here and no need for outside the box thinking either. After all, he's old, not really good-looking, and with that NY accent maybe not so well educated? Who knows how each of us deals with our biases? I agree with the call for Wasserman-Schul tz to resign as head of the DNC; she should be supporting all the Dem. candidates. But the miracle is that Bernie has outfoxed them all with his huge crowds, biases not withstanding. Go Bernie! Stay in it until your funds run dry!
+42 # economagic 2016-03-31 19:20
"But the miracle is that Bernie has outfoxed them all with his huge crowds, biases not withstanding."

And sometimes the public are not THAT stupid either!
+9 # Douglas Jack 2016-03-31 21:02
THE MIRACLE I'm surprised that; all political parties, Repugs, Demos, Greens etc are trying to lead by supposedly capturing power from the top-down. We know that; when brain-cancer sets in exemplified by Killery, but really spread widely among the civil service, its not possible to simply replace a governing party. Top-down is a colonial tradition for both right & left, imposed & regimented through colonial violence.

Sovereign solutions from top & bottom, the constitutions of 1st nations here in the Americas & humanity's worldwide 'indigenous' (Latin 'self-generatin g') ancestors propose for community 'animists / activists' to 'organize-from- the-tree-roots' , mutual-aid among ourselves 'economically' (Greek 'oikos' = 'home' + 'namein' = 'gift-or-servic e' from the bottom-up. All our indigenous ancestors developed Economic Democracy by organiz-ing 1st among Multihome-Dwell ing-Complexes with approximately 100 people, where female-male intergeneration al collaboration.

Bernie calls for a movement of change, which can't happen only politically from the top-down. Strength lies in the areas of expertise which we build each in our own area of expertise both female & male, young & old.
Humanity's 'indigenous' (Latin 'self-generatin g') ancestors structured life-long universal progressive ownership in multihome & specialized Production Societies / Guilds where everyone participates.
+3 # Jim Young 2016-04-02 14:34
Quoting tswhiskers:
...Bernie has outfoxed them all with his huge crowds...

Telling the truth does seem to outfox them.

As "Give'm Hell" Harry Truman said, "I never did give them hell, I just told them the truth, and they thought it was hell."
+76 # RMDC 2016-03-31 14:30
"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."

I just have to disagree with this and there are very many journalists who can testify to the fact that they are made to lie by their editors and publishers. Check out Kristina Borjessor's books on her work as a journalist. She details very many cases of journalists who were fired and blacklisted for telling the truth.

Has Reich never heard of Operation Paperclip -- the conspiracy between Frank Wiesner of the CIA and Philip Graham of the Washington Post. it involved almost all media in the US, who were pushed around by these two.

It is no surprise that the WaPo is leading the anti-Sanders campaign. it is the CIA's puppet newspaper.
+53 # Patriot 2016-03-31 17:47
Reputations? Ha! What reputations? Public trust? Ditto! Since when has anyone in the media displayed the slighted concern about the public's opinion of their pititful infotainment output?

We're talking about the folks who couldn't wait for us to barge into Iraq, who have unqestioningly swallowed everything any Republican administration peddled, and far too mch of what little the Democratic administrations have doled out--and crediting them with concern for their reputations?

The media are almost entirely owned by the very wealthy few, who want Republicans, or, at least, good old reliable Hillary, whose pockets are being stuffed with their cash, to continue to funnel every benefit of the economy into their pockets. Period.

They have no concern for their reputations, have zip point NO integrity, and couldn't care less whether we trust, or even believe, the pap they put out.
+70 # Candie 2016-03-31 16:02
The 1% also own the mainstream media and they know if Bernie wins their heyday is over. Things will start to turn back towards the little guy...their heads will explode if Bernie gets the nominee and their only recourse may be Trump! They want Hillary to win to keep business as usual, but we all knew that.

Keep going Bernie, regardless of what they say you can and will win. The powers that be are terrified.
-36 # ericlipps 2016-03-31 19:49
Quoting Candie:
The 1% also own the mainstream media and they know if Bernie wins their heyday is over. Things will start to turn back towards the little guy...their heads will explode if Bernie gets the nominee and their only recourse may be Trump! They want Hillary to win to keep business as usual, but we all knew that.

Keep going Bernie, regardless of what they say you can and will win. The powers that be are terrified.

I don't believe there's any realistic chance Sen. Sanders will win the general election even if he manages to become the Democrats' nominee.

I fear that "if Bernie wins" the Democratic nomination, it'll be 1972 all over again: an earnest, genuinely liberal Democrat with a fervent following who gets trampled by a cynical, dark-natured right-wing Republican.

It doesn't help that Sanders keeps talking about a "political revolution." Such rhetoric plays into the hands of those who want to portray him as an outright Communist.
+37 # mebemo 2016-03-31 20:47
The operative word in your second paragraph is fear. Why look backwards into darkness? Move toward the light instead. We're getting a second chance to correct the stupidity of 1972.

I agree "political revolution" is a flawed slogan. I prefer political transformation. And I hope to see it.
+11 # banichi 2016-04-01 09:26
I don't know what news sources you pay attention to, but you have missed quite a bit. Polling by organizations other than the MSM says consistently that Bernie will win over Trump or any of the others, where Hillary will not. And even more telling, the supporters of Bernie's campaign have no idealistic progressive axe to grind, unlike 1972 - which I was around for.

The supporters of Bernie's campaign are simply fed up with being on the receiving end of the status quo, which leaves us all screwed (except for the very wealthy). You seem to forget that Bernie is not a 'liberal democrat' and never has been - a point which all his supporters understand.

The political revolution is happening right before us, and if that scares you, then that's your problem. It is not 1972 this time.
+10 # Douglas Jack 2016-03-31 20:50
Robert Reich, RE: "mainstream media are incapable of conspiring with anyone or anything." A particularly ignorant statement. Time to research a little! Yes Oligarch control is strategic.

The Global Economy Is a Giant Ponzi Scheme Chris Hedges & Michael Hudson, CounterPunch 26Mar’16

World Class Journalist/Edit or Dr. Udo Ulfkotee Spills the Beans, Admits Mainstream Media is Completely Fake, Arjun Walia, Global Research, 27Mar’16 13 min.

Sharyl Attkisson, 11 min.

Amber Lyon reveals CNN lies & war propaganda interviewed by Liz Wahl RT 11 min. 2Oct’12

Criminal Bankers Control US Government Push War-Paul Craig Roberts Greg Hunter 27Mar’16

CIA Operation Mockingbird, Senator Frank Church, Video on CIA funding & manipulation of U.S. news media. Secret CIA campaign to influence domestic & foreign media beginning in 1950s.

Operation Mockingbird: CIA Media Manipulation 45 min.
+5 # RMDC 2016-04-01 08:56
Candie -- i'm not sure the rulers of the US are so afraid of Sanders. Of course, they would prefer Hillary. She's their ideal president. But I think they could live with Sanders. He's a team player. He's been in elected office for a long time and knows how to compromise. The rulers would give up a little, but they won't lose all. Their heyday won't be over.

I think they are more afraid of Trump than Sanders. The MSM which the rulers own are on a scorched earth campaign to destroy Trump. Trump is not predictable and there is no indication he will be a compromiser. He's a true renegade.

Sanders would be a great step in the right direction. But real socialist change will be incremental and slow. The rulers will still have more power than any president. The banksters can collapse the economy any time they choose. The president would be held hostage.
+33 # wnappel 2016-03-31 17:26
With all due respect to Mr. Reich, this is not an either-or situation, and neither is life in general on a lot of other things. It's clear that the Clinton cadre has advised their champion that ignoring Sanders is the best course of inaction. I think for instance that it's dawned on them that Sanders can only gain from a debate, and Clinton only lose.

The Media may not specifically agree, but they take this cue from the Clinton campaign and from each other. This may not be conspiring, but the parallel inaction concerning Sanders can't responsibly be chalked entirely up to ignorance. Much of the East Coast mores are deeply embedded in signals that West Coasters can't read. In another context, this fosters and preserves intense racism to within a "liberal" Northeast.

Both theories are true, though the "conspiracy" theory operates at a different level.
+43 # RWP 2016-03-31 17:45
Echoing the others I also disagree with your too generous conclusion. I am, or have been, a reader of the Guardian which not only neglects Bernie (sin of omission) but is filled with direct propaganda pieces praising HRC which cannot qualify as editorial commentary (sins of commission). They read like paid for output by the campaign. They may not be, but the connections of the authors to HRC are conspicuous. And they have degraded a paper that is going downhill fast.
+6 # DaveEwoldt 2016-04-01 20:56
The Guardian did the same thing to Jeremy Corbyn--and for the same reasons. Markets, privatization, neoliberalism in general is not to be questioned. The economic status quo, and the power it is tied to, is the same on both sides of the Atlantic.
+38 # Timshel 2016-03-31 18:31
Media owners like their property, including their employees, to reflect their views, and if they do not, a message is sent - less favorable assignments, no promotions, smaller raises and so on. Sometimes the message is not subtle at all. You do not need a conspiracy, just that corporate media owners all want the same thing - maximum profit selling their line of baloney that profits are good for America etc.

Look at what happened to "lefy-wing" MSNBC - the firing of Ed Schulz, the exile of Sharpton to Sunday morning and making Alex Wagner a floater - all willing to be fair to Bernie - this was was a warning. Who owns MSNBC - Comcast - very hostile to labor. Hayes sometimes looks scared - why? Maddow now sounds giddy at times and had shown some fairness then turned sharply right and became a Clinton Surrogate not just a subtle supporter and uncharacteristi cally lied about Bernie - WHY? You do not need to fire everyone to send a message. Look at the WSJ and watch as it slowly becomes a rag
+23 # dascher 2016-03-31 18:39
The major media abandoned any pretense that they are the Fourth Estate. They are not in the business of informing, they are in the business of entertaining. The most financially successful media are the trashiest purveyors of rumors about celebrities' quirks - with lots of pictures.

When the media cover a Trump rally they have to agree to Trump's ground rules - all media stay in the "media cage" where Trump can find them during his ritual denunciation which often includes pointing to specific individual reporters whom he claims have defamed him. Until this week, NO MEDIA has reported that they have been reporting Trump rallies while being intimidated by frothing at the mouth Trump supporters who he surely recruits from the same dark places as his old friends at World Wrestling Entertainment got their bloodthirsty fans. Real journalists would not agree to report while being physically threatened - at least not without mentioning the fact that they have agreed to do so.

The folks that the major media send to the Trump rallies only know him as that "super successful businessman who copyrighted the phrase 'you're fired'" - which is of course false since he is not a super successful businessman nor was he able to copyright that phrase.

Bernie needs to hire some strippers and goons to come to his rallies to carry racist, homophobic, sexist, anti-semitic signs if he wants the mainstream media to think that his unprecedented (in so many ways) rallies are "newsworthy".
+32 # dascher 2016-03-31 18:50
I should have also mentioned the concentration of ownership in the media where we now have 90% of all media owned by a handful of corporations and individuals. That wouldn't be a such a problem if the interests AND world views of that handful were not in line with the interests and world views of the rest of the 1%.

Finally, you cannot seriously read the NY Times and think that they have given Bernie the coverage he has certainly earned - from his announcement to his ("expected", ho hum) sweeping of 3 states last week, from the (lack of) coverage of his massive rallies to the constant drumbeat of their columnists shilling for Hilary (who is "the only rational choice"). They gave Carly Fiorina, a vanity candidate if there ever was one, more space and less critical coverage than they gave Bernie.

One of he most irritating things that the mainstream media has been doing is mis-reporting the 'horse race'. They headline who "won" each state even though most of the states do not allocate their delegates using a winner-take-all rule. In some states, the "winner" got one more delegate than the "loser". But you would not know that from the coverage in the major media (including the NY Times).
+20 # economagic 2016-03-31 19:33
Even that 90 percent figure does not create a complete picture of the extent to which the media are consolidated in the US. The majority of that 90 percent is controlled (if not owned in all cases) by about a half-dozen giant transnational media conglomerates (everything from birthday cards to textbooks to encyclopedias to teevee), and most of the rest is controlled by another half dozen or so. This is not just digital or electronic media, but everything: Roughly 90 percent of the information that reaches roughly 90 percent of the US public is filtered through one or more of these few branches of Global Megacorp (aka RAMJAC Corporation -- Vonnegut) at some point.
+15 # MindDoc 2016-03-31 19:09
I can accept that "mainstream media" gets driven from within corporate bubbles (DC-NY) & that there may not be formal "conspiracy" meetings to draw up a collective narrative. Otherwise Fox, MSNBC, and CBS/PBS/ABC/NBC would be indistinguishab le from each other. Not true - yet.

BUT, as others are suggesting, it certainly seems like there are widely-shared mindsets guiding "news" organizations as a whole, from what we all read and hear. Not surprising given the 90% oligarch ownership/spons orship of "news" - no doubt a big motivator for editorial directions all mirroring corporate narratives - as with fracking, for example. It is frustrating to the many alert, involved news-followers and active citizens to see ALL media apparently filtering out big stories being discussed all over the Internet, including on their own sites. It's not the bubble, it's blinders!

I can't understand why, amid all the fluff & lockstep reports from the networks", nobody at all - with the exception of Katie Couric - noticed this "defection" of a major Trump supporter, spokesperson.

This plain-English article speaks so many more volumes about" the real Donald Trump" than any 10 stories about his security manager or his history with women or bankruptcy.

This has NOT been 'de-bunked' (or sued) & provides insight into the mindset of the Donald's die-hard followers. Cult members may need 'de-programming ' to re-join reality. Here's a survivor whose story may help!
+18 # Promoting Peace 2016-03-31 19:18
I totally agree with the postings here, particularly that corporate greed, fear, and power is at the root of this.

Bernie has been straight forward in declaring opposition to the corruption that exist and is scaring the crap out of the super-rich, the 1%, and they aren't going to let change happen if they can avoid it.

And, as a side note, sadly there are many superficial people in this country who would rather watch and hear about the GOP Clown show, and who's wearing what color suit, than to become informed about the real issues this country is facing.

A quote I read earlier says a lot about Trump, "No. You don't need to talk sense into him. Everybody is entitled to their own madness. You have to talk sense into the people who are not seeing the madness."

The fact that there are so many people who can't see the madness is quite sad, but still these people are a small percentage of all Americans.

This is why I feel Trump winning the nomination would be good, as he should be extremely easy to beat in the general election.

There is a lot for Bernie to use against him at that time, including, along with much, much, more, that he has been sued by the government for refusing to rent to Blacks back in the 70's.

And, the "Never Trump" movement keeps growing, and he certainly shot himself in the foot yesterday wanting to punish women who have abortions.
+16 # economagic 2016-03-31 19:40
Professor Reich is sounding more like a lefty every week. Go, Robert -- it's OK! Not only is it possible to be leftish and still be both realistic and academically respectable: That combination is almost (not quite) unavoidable, precisely the reason the Kochs, the Popes, Karl Rove, et al, get so worked up about it and try so hard to buy up or buy off educational institutions, as here in North Carolina.
-24 # Shades of gray matter 2016-03-31 19:48
PROFIT seeking media corporations and career oriented "news reporting" realty TV celebs are in a bind. They certainly do not want to cover a socialist favorably. On the other hand, they want ongoing access to him, and therefore NEVER really ask how on earth our Congress will cough up all that silly pie in the sky he promises his gullible supporters. Nor do they address his former associations with groups favorable to KGB-STASI era Castro, emerging autocrat Ortega, or support for Iran hostage takers. The corp media have been in the palm of Bernie's hands up to now. Only Chris Matthews challenged him, and the other media "conspired" to totally leave that tape alone. WHY? They POUNCE on Trump, Hillary, but let Bernie totally off the hook. Can that last?
+3 # Robbee 2016-03-31 21:23
Why the Major Media Marginalize Bernie?

- it's okay, robert!

sorting our thoughts, i believe we agree that today we have -

the control of government by large corporations.

i believe crud, kasick, h hill and bernie are capitalist socialists

a political and economic system of government in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

a political and economic system of government that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be (owned or) regulated by the community as a whole.

i believe rump is a demagog as in -

a political and economic system of government that is authoritarian and nationalistic. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, a strong demagogic approach, and corporations organized so as to serve the state.

The term Fascism was first used of the totalitarian right-wing nationalist regime of Mussolini in Italy (1922–43), and the regimes of the Nazis in Germany and Franco in Spain were also fascist.

a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

the control of government by large corporations.

what do you think?
+5 # RNLDaWy 2016-03-31 22:01
East Coast Snoab-a-torium ... they also seek to marginalize Bernie .. and they are not even paying attention to the 'Elephant in the Room' ... which could mean that Hillary is not such a good candidate after all .. and could lose badly in the general election .. won't be until post that someone of their brilliant 30's to 40's something 'experts' bless us with later on ...
+11 # jimallyn 2016-03-31 23:00
"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."

Um, people still watch Fox.
+5 # corals33 2016-03-31 23:02
so America does not have a free press then.Putting paid to another lie bandied about when it suits.Thanks for letting us poor fools know even if it has to be stated in a round about manner.
+15 # GDW 2016-04-01 00:24
I am a little surprised at Mr Reich's stance. I always enjoy and learn from his articles. It's no secret the media are downplaying Bernie's campaign, It's right out in the open. He does not represent the oligarchy. Everybody knows it.

The corporate media is not a 3rd party bystander. This not the first time.
Just look how they lied about Iraq. We are one of the most propagandized people in the world, and they believe what they are told.

The media watch group FAIR points out how journalists are filtered and weeded out as they make their way up the corporate media ladder. If they don't tow the line they are ignored. Real journalism is found in the independent alternative press. That's why all of us are reading this.
+2 # goodsensecynic 2016-04-01 05:28
Reich is almost right.

The corporate media do not constitute a conspiracy because because they're "incapable" of doing so; they do not constitute a conspiracy because they don't "need" to.

It's true that they read from the same script, but they're not conspirators - just like-minded people working in similar institutions and engaged in a common project.
+2 # corals33 2016-04-01 09:37
the nicest way to put it and applies to all the major institutions in "society".
+1 # CarolinMexico 2016-04-01 05:42
I agree with Reich. It is the same with the many government conspiracy theories. You just have to have had the experience of working at a senior level, to understand that no one can keep a secret and that conspiracies require much more than most agencies could manage, not to mention the courage to act. The media is just lazy, but another victory or two and the tone will change -- just as it has for Trump.
+4 # GDW 2016-04-01 06:33
The corporate news presents the news from corporations and for the Oligarchy. From a corporate point of view and has various ways of emphasizing one thing and ignoring another. It is for corporate, Wall Street, the military industrial complex and the oligarchy's interest.
+4 # newell 2016-04-01 08:33
A clear rational perspective. I can only add that a redistribution of wealth, which is any progressive tax change, any socialism, no matter how Eisenhower-like , is a threat to the 1% and their media.
+5 # ktony 2016-04-01 11:59
Quoting Frank Zappa:
I am gross and perverted. I'm obsessed and deranged.
I have existed for years but very little has changed
I'm the tool of the government and industry, too
For I am destined to rule and regulate you
I may be vile and pernicious, but you can't look away
I make you think I'm delicious with the stuff that I say
I'm the best you can get. Have you guessed me, yet?
I'm the slime oozing out from your TV set.
"I'm the Slime"
+2 # Curtis1027 2016-04-01 20:39
Only puny secrets need protection. Big secrets are kept by public incredulity.

Marshall McLuhan, Canadian Philosopher 1911-1980
+3 # 2016-04-02 00:09
I would add Washington, D.C. as another media bubble. Although, an echo chamber is more accurate. The National Press corps is notorious for pack mentality and pack reporting. New York, may be the financial power center as Dr. Reich says but the political power center is in D.C. The media there are at great risk of losing access if they piss off any of the powerful in Congress or their handlers. So, we get pablum, rather than news.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.