Oh what a mystery. Pat Buchanan and many, many others just can't figure out how Obama could have spent so much money and not "closed the deal." Is there something wrong with him? We need to spend the next two weeks discussing it.
This is why Obama lost PA:
(Note: I included a few allies in this graphic. They are exceptions.)
These are the people, more than any others, that shape American politics. The editorial boards of the major papers, a few columnists, and of course talk radio personalities have an influence. But nothing compares to this crowd. They set the tone and the terms of our national discussion. And they can move poll numbers like a toy.
And for the last two months, they have waged an all out assault on Barack Obama. It is unfortunate that the term "swiftboat", when used as a verb, is attributed to the small group of hacks that made a few videos lying about John Kerry's war record. Because the real swiftboating didn't come from them. It came from the crowd shown above.
There will always be political hacks. People who lie, and try to make mountains out of flag pins. But it is only with the amplification and distortion of the our political discourse, facilitated by the babbling class above, that these hacks are allowed to have an impact.
It is simply incredible to watch now, as pundit after pundit, including some of our allies, act bewildered as to why Obama didn't win Pennsylvania when he spent so much money, as though the last two months never happened. As though the Reverend Wright swiftboating never happened. As though the NAFTA ploy never happened. As though the "bitter" ploy never happened. As though the ABC "debate" never happened.
Of course it wasn't just the swiftboating of the media that worked against Obama. Kos accurately lays out a few other factors. But let's face it. We have a serious fucking problem on our hands. Even with the growing online movement, and expanding penetration of progressive-like media into the mass communications bubble, the power of the establishment media to manipulate public opinion is still beyond compare.
What motivates these people is a topic for another diary. But what is clear is that they do not share the values, concerns and priorities of the American public. In fact, they seem determined to divert our attention towards anything but the priorities of the American public. And there can be no question that in doing so, they serve the interests of corporate, military and government power.
Remember, it was these people who sold us George Bush, the all-American guy, and Al Gore, "the liar." It was these people who sold us the Iraq war, hook, line and sinker. And it was these people who completely distorted and obscured John Edwards' message of corporate corruption.
And now they're distorting and obscuring Barack Obama. Ask yourself, aside from the swiftboating and manuscandals, has the depiction of Obama's campaign even remotely resembled what we've experienced on the ground? The enthusiasm, the inspiration, the feeling of the Obama campaign? Is it an accident that not one television outlet accurately conveyed the historical nature of Obama's 40,000 person rally in Philly?
The answer is no. The media filter not only occludes information, it distorts the information they let through.
The fact is, however, our push back is working to some extent. I honestly don't believe the corporate clowns above would attempt the disgraceful and blatant swiftboating of AL Gore now as they did in 2000. They are aware of our criticism. But all they've done is be a little more subtle at it (ABC debate not withstanding). And now they've come up with some excuses. As BarbinMD acutely observes:
And as Stephanopolous pointed out, "there are some clear signals from Senator Obama's opponents that all of these issues are going to be put together in a general argument." So there you have it; the rightwingnutosphere will be attacking Obama as an America hating, terrorist-enabler, so naturally ABC had to beat them to the punch.
Enemy may be too strong a word. But it is simply imperative that we in the netroots spend as much time attacking the establishment media as we do our political opponents. We have to constantly be on guard for when we're being lulled into frames and distorted priorities that serve the interests of the of the ruling class and distract us from the issues that matter.
And our best weapon is right here, and at countless other progressive sites throughout the netroots. The establishment media's weapon is the ability to control information. Ours must be to discredit that information.
We've gone a long way towards making Fox News a laughing stock. We need extend that to the so-called "credible" media, for they are far more dangerous. This is why I didn't even include Fox in my graphic. The real power is in the media outlets that still have the aura of credibility, at least to many Americans.
I know it may sound dramatic, but this is nothing less than information warfare. Our democracy is being manipulated by a very small, powerful group of people who do not have our interests in mind. We need to remove their power, in the only way we can - by exposing them.
[Update] Just to spell it out: I created that graphic to show the small concentration of voices in our democracy. Thus the inclusion of good guys like Stewart and Olbermann. I did not create the graphic to use in this diary but found it effective as long as I included a disclaimer that there are allies and exceptions.
The graphic stands on its own as a conveyance of how few voices make up the media establishment, and how much power they have. I assumed readers would be able to recognize that not all of these voices are equally problematic. But seeing them all lumped together, good and bad, is somewhat striking isn't it. It took me a while and is actually poster sized.
Any suggestion on another caption, or an addendum to it, is welcome.
[Update 2] One other point. There are always multiple factors that can swing a race. I pinpoint this one not because it is necessarily more determinative, but because it was the most egregious. But it could have been the most determinative. It is highly possible that without the malicious media coverage, Hillary would not have been in the PA primary.