I've had trouble saying the term "mainstream media" like I used to, because over the past decade, a real shift has occurred in the media space thanks to the internet. A streamer with a solid following can bring in numbers that the big corporate broadcasters can only dream of. More people watch popular streamers on Rumble for their news than various CNN shows.
The corporate media, with its bottomless pits of cash, massive sound stages, armies of crewmen, and big-time names in television, are having to compete with a young man in his bedroom with a webcam and some cheap lighting. I find that both hilarious and a bit ironic. For ages, the corporate media has been looking down at the people, lying to them, and abusing them, and now they're being overtaken by them.
But a part of that is the corporate media's fault. They used their platforms to push obvious lies to the people, which was easy to get away with before humanity had the internet. Today, a lie can get around the world quickly, but the truth doesn't have to get its pants on anymore. It can destroy the lie right there in bed. For instance, X's "community notes" feature is a master at destroying false media narratives before they can truly get started.
Yet, push they do.
And that's lead to their ongoing downfall. Few actually trust the media anymore, according to recent studies.
(America's Trust In the Media Has Cratered to an All-Time Low)
And while we all know this is the truth, hard evidence continues to come out that shows the corporate media is really just a mouthpiece for the Democrat Party. It's pure propaganda, not news.
According to the Media Research Center, after analyzing the corporate news landscape for a time, MRC found that it set a new record in terms of lopsided coverage. Not only did it prop up Kamala Harris with positive news coverage by unforgivable amounts, it focused on painting Trump as the villain with negative news coverage even more:
One week before Election Day, a new analysis from the Media Research Center finds that broadcast evening news coverage of the 2024 presidential race has been the most lopsided in history. Since July, ABC, CBS and NBC have treated Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris to 78 percent positive coverage, while these same networks have pummeled former Republican President Donald Trump with 85 percent negative coverage. (See Methodology explanation at the end of this post.)
The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage (91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton). It’s even greater than in 2020, when Joe Biden was treated to 66 percent positive coverage, vs. 92 percent negative for Trump.
Something to "wow" at, though not entirely surprising. This iteration of Harris is, after all, an entirely media-born creation. Without it, she would've been disqualified from the race before it even started, and it's entirely possible a primary would have been held after Biden was forced out. Of course, one has to wonder if Biden would have even been president without the corporate media too.
The MRC continues with some interesting details about the time spent:
The main reason for the imbalance: Since July, the Big Three have swamped their audiences with more than 230 minutes of airtime — virtually all of it negative — about an array of personal controversies surrounding the former President, yet provided extremely light coverage or altogether ignored many controversies involving Vice President Harris. Instead, Harris’s coverage has been larded with enthusiastic quotes from pro-Harris voters, creating a positive “vibe” for the Democrat even as network reporters criticize Trump themselves.
For this report, MRC analysts reviewed all 660 stories about the presidential campaign that aired on the ABC, CBS or NBC evening newscasts from July 21 (the day President Biden ended his candidacy) through October 25, including weekends. Total coverage added up to 24 hours, 15 minutes, almost evenly divided among the three networks: 8 hours, 20 minutes on NBC; 8 hours, 13 minutes on CBS; and 7 hours, 42 minutes on ABC).
This puts some of the reasoning leftists often use against Trump into context. You'll often hear from leftists how Trump is immoral and awful. Did you see that viral video of the woman who confronted another woman for having a Trump sign in her front yard? You can see her line of thinking in many people on the left who have this outlook on Trump.
Harris has her own demons and scandals, and the media is very adamant that they're not talked about. It makes sense, because part of their argument for being the anti-Trump party is that they're the more moral figures in the room. They're clearly not, but any talk about immoral behavior on the left is either painted as progressive and accepting or squelched completely.
CNN has done this twice very recently, once when Kevin O'Leary tried to bring up the fact that Harris wasn't nominated democratically, which is weird for a party that supposedly cherishes Democracy, and another when CNN contributor Scott Jennings tried to bring up Doug Emhoff's abuse of women.
Given all this, is it any surprise the media is losing its value to the American people?