It’s Gut-Check Time For The Mainstream Press

The dismal dawn of the Trump era begins with a mainstream media at war with itself. At the same time that some big news outlets are defiantly and publically calling out Trump’s lies, others are quietly slipping back into their more traditional roles as standard bearers for the status quo.

Like all big American businesses, the loyalties of the mainstream news media are not with the readers or even the subscribers, but with the shareholders of their parent companies. The corporate media is a profit driven enterprise, and staking out what are considered unpopular or antiestablishment positions is not a good business strategy. Trump, however, is still an enigma in the eyes of the press. Yes, he is president, but he lost the popular vote by nearly three million ballots and is intensely disliked by a lot of Americans. And he is obviously crazy.

But old habits are hard to break. The mainstream news media has been the lapdog of wealthy elites, America’s intelligence organizations and the military/industrial complex since the end of World War II, and you don’t just turn your back on your oldest supporters because there’s a lunatic in the White House.

Case in point. In a recent interview with ABC News anchor David Muir, Trump repeated a well-worn lie that two people were shot in Chicago while Obama was giving his farewell address on January 10.  The political point of Trump’s lie is to underscore the out-of-control violence in Chicago and Obama’s failure to curb crime in his own hometown.

Two reporters from the Chicago Tribune investigated Trump’s claims and surprise, found they were not true. However, ABC News edited these false claims out of the televised interview and only included them in a written transcript on the ABC News website. For reasons that can only be guessed at, ABC essentially let Donald off the hook.

This is a tipping point for the American mainstream press. Will they have the courage to continue calling out the lies of Donald Trump and his administration or will they fall back into old patterns of cowering from the truth and covering up for the rich and powerful? Only time will tell.

Clinton Picks Signaling an Anti-Progressive, Corporate Friendly Administration

Hopes were high among liberals and progressives in January 2009 as this country’s first African American was inaugurated President of the United States. Barack Obama had run his campaign around a simple slogan, “change,” and for many of us who voted for him, that meant charting a new course away from the horrendous failures of the Bush administration toward peace and prosperity. It didn’t take long, however, for us to see that our hopes were once again misplaced.

In the early months of 2009, anticipation turned to trepidation as Obama began announcing his new cabinet, and we saw positions being filled by long-time Wall Street insiders, well-connected Washington bureaucrats and political cronies, none of whom could remotely be considered “agents of change.” Instead of a new direction, we were treated to a new face continuing many of Bush’s worst national and international policies.

Fast-forward to 2016. In this election cycle, it’s a race between a particularly repulsive Republican, Trump and the Democrat who could be the first female President in U.S. history, Hillary Clinton. That sounds good on paper, but once again, what is being billed as a historic moment in this country’s history is turning into a win for the status quo, business-as-usual crowd that actually runs America. The only difference this time around is that we progressives have no illusions about Clinton’s establishment leanings, despite the requisite liberal rhetoric of the campaign season.

Do I sound cynical or realistic? Exhibit A: Clinton chose as her running mate Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, a moderate Democrat who has supported, and recently voted for, the onerous TPP agreement. Exhibit B: Just yesterday, Clinton named former Colorado Democratic Senator and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to be chair of her presidential transition team, the position that will oversee the selection of thousands of presidential appointments should Clinton win the election.

So what’s the big deal with Salazar? Well, as a Senator and Interior Secretary, he continuously demonstrated he was a friend to big oil, gas, and the mining and ranching industries. He opened the Arctic Ocean to oil drilling and played Michael Brown with his botched response to the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. On top of that he is an ardent supporter of the TPP and fracking. In short, Salazar is an old school corporate shill disguised as a Democratic politician, and Clinton’s choice for one of the most important positions on her transition team.

The national media is doing its job by perpetuating the myth that American voters have a real choice in this presidential election, and contrasting an obvious nutcase like Trump against Hillary surely helps reinforce that narrative, but reality is quite different. Whether Hillary or Trump is elected President, the powers behind the scenes will continue to implement the military/industrial/media agenda at the expense of democracy and the economic future of the 99 percent. Hillary is already indicating the direction she wants to take this country as President, and it is a ruinous, if familiar, path of greed, war and environmental decimation.