Spreading Their Views
Terry H. Schwadron
July 8, 2022
Several news accounts during the last week have taken note of the continuing propaganda wars that have supplanted general consumption of news, particularly in issues of political contention.
The only takeaway — no surprise — is that the breadth and widespread nature of disinformation reflects an American appetite for sharp attacks with less-than-persuasive evidence as our preferred communications.
Many long for a time when the answer to What-Happened was divorced, and possibly distanced, from Whose-Fault-Is-It or What-to-Do? We seem to have passed right by What-Do-We-Know to jump to predetermined conclusions.
It’s why it is difficult for Americans, now inured to instant reaction, to have even the modicum of patience for learning about the reason behind the shooting or the ruling, or for even for considering, jury-like, what evidence might justify a next action. Combine the emotional volatility of repeated claims of widespread election fraud, for example, or Jan. 6 narratives with an insistence on being right — and increasingly armed with weapons– and we have the constant makings now of confrontation long before we settle on what happened.
My own career in the news industry was built around constant discovery of what was interesting or unclear or unknown. The process was as interesting as the news that resulted, and the rewards or rebukes were around how rigorous we could make the case that something was true, not about whom it helped politically. Business and labor were equal for examination, as were left and right politicians, natural and made-up enemy nations. It was the New York Times, which many on the Right consider Left leaning, that first disclosed Hillary Clinton’s email woes, as an example.
Those days seem long gone, and now we only seek out information with which we tend to agree before hearing it, and, in many cases, the businesses behind the various news producers seem willing to help meet that perception.
What Are We Learning?
The New York Times had an interesting look at talk radio this week, finding after examination of thousands of radio news reports that election fraud claims from 2020 are widespread, the reports, while false, contribute to the belief that the midterm elections this November cannot be trusted.
The Times found more than 5,000 mentions of “Democrats cheating” and similar ideas on syndicated radio shows and local broadcasts this year, according to an analysis of data from Critical Mention, a media monitoring service. Similar ideas were mentioned a few hundred times on television shows and podcasts tracked by Critical Mention during the same period.
While Fox and others have pursued the 2020 election falsehoods, “the loudest and most consistent booster of these unfounded claims has been talk radio, where conservative hosts reduce the jumble of false voter fraud, theories into a two-word mantra: ‘Democrats cheat,’” The Times reported.
In turn, these broadcasts are reflected in manyfold-more social media posts that keep alive a theory that we are seeing fall apart anew in the televised hearings of the House Select Committee on Jan. 6.
After the beginning of the Jan. 6 hearings, Sinclair Broadcast Group, which has a long string of conservative talk radio stations nationwide, did not cover or report on the rest and characterized testimony undercutting the false election claims in ways that were heavily tilted toward Republican talking points or that quoted lawmakers opposed to the committee’s investigation, reported Media Matters, a progressive-leaning press watch site.
A Message, Repeated
National Public Radio said Its own review of how Right-leaning media and political claims showed “false claims of a stolen election are still spreading.”
NPR sees a new strategy emerging. “Instead of trickling down from former President Donald Trump’s Twitter account, the movement has gone grassroots, with election denial influencers traveling the country to share their conspiracy theories with politicians and voters.”
Over 18 months since Jan. 6, 2021, four election denialists whom NPR tracked have been slated to speak at least 308 events in 45 states. The events were often small, held in restaurants and churches, backyards and community centers. It is a Rightist movement that could influence how future elections are run.
The result has primary election success for Republican candidates taking the most extreme positions on the elections and “Democratic cheating.” In many cases, the primaries are advancing candidates who can have a say in who votes and how votes are counted. But the message is that it will be Democrats who will cheat again in November and beyond.
It is interesting that radio is seen as perhaps the most influential conduit for right-wing thinking, despite the rise of podcasts and social media. The audience includes older listeners and blue-collar workers who follow it while working. The Times quotes media experts who warn that talk radio channels, many of which air political commentary 24 hours a day, receive far too little scrutiny compared with other mass media.
The New York Times also looked at disinformation as a subject for political morass in Washington, citing the recently abandoned administration attempt to set up a Homeland Security panel to flag issues of concern. The Times notes that “threats from disinformation today involve issues that not long ago might have transcended partisan politics. Instead, disinformation has become mired in the country’s deepening partisan and geographical divides over issues like abortion, guns and climate change.”
The political horse race touts generally have talked up Republican advances nationally, cited inflation and supply-line snarls among the reasons for Democratic dissatisfaction. But the widespread anger over Supreme Court rulings wiping out national abortion rights, loosening gun laws and handcuffing the Biden administration over climate moves is having discernible effect on such calculations. In Georgia, gubernatorial Democratic candidate Stacy Adams has registered vast numbers of new voters.
The election may reflect only what listeners think they have heard.
##