Exposing a media propaganda campaign via graphical data

Mass media in the United States have degenerated into a neo-Soviet status as propaganda organs for the ruling clique. Most Americans, other than Democrats whose propaganda is being pushed, understand.  

Just 7% of Americans have "a great deal" of trust and confidence in the media, and 27% have "a fair amount." Meanwhile, 28% of U.S. adults say they do not have very much confidence and 38% have none at all in newspapers, TV and radio. Notably, this is the first time that the percentage of Americans with no trust at all in the media is higher than the percentage with a great deal or a fair amount combined. (snip)

Americans' trust in the media remains sharply polarized along partisan lines, with 70% of Democrats, 14% of Republicans and 27% of independents saying they have a great deal or fair amount of confidence.

But it is helpful to have graphical data that illustrates the way that media hasten to join the propaganda campaigns that are dictated for them by the ruling clique, much as the Soviet media of yore hastened to join propaganda campaigns celebrating record harvests as people were starving. The Twitter account of KanekoaTheGreat provides a graph demonstrating the compliance of the key pilot fish that tell the rest of the media what the news agenda is.



Notice that the mentions of the inflammatory words related to race declined at first as Barack Obama campaigned and was inaugurated on the basis of an implicit promise to heal our racial wounds deriving from the “original sin” of slavery. But as soon as he started governing, Barack Obama began following Saul Alinsky’s advice to “rub raw the resentments” and fan the flames of racial resentment. After all, one doesn’t “fundamentally change” a country without harnessing mass anger in order to overcome the natural resistance to change. So, right around 2012 mentions of racists and racism started climbing, with the Washington Post, the most obedient servant of the deep state, in  the lead, with the New York Times closely following. These two newspapers are the most residually prestigious media organs, and are relied upon by lesser outlets, from other major papers (see the LA Times and WSJ following them with a lag) and broadcast networks down to local TV stations and newspapers, to guide their understanding of what merits broadcast time and column inches.  

When Donald Trump was inaugurated in 2017, mentions of the two incendiary terms skyrocketed, of course. America was now well into agitprop territory, where worsening racial tensions were to blamed on the ultimate enemy, the Emmanuel Goldstein of 1984, Donald Trump.   

In a second graph, KanekoaTheGreat shows how well the propaganda campaign worked on its selected targets.



White liberals swallowed the propaganda line hook, line, and sinker. White moderates did so, too, but to a lesser extent. But white conservatives only bought it as long as Obama was president. During the presidential campaign of 2016, they stayed static, and when President Trump took office and started governing to raise incomes of the poorest the fastest, and treating people the same regardless of race, their belief in the power of racism actually declined. They seemed to be guided by facts on the ground less than propaganda.

I’d argue that conservatives are less influenced by propaganda than are liberals and moderates, but that may be because the propaganda is directed against our ideas, so it is more visible than to people whose assumptions are being confirmed by the media.

Graphic credit: Twitter

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com