Why Jeremy Corbyn's media-bashing is Trumpian - and dangerous for democracy

[Soph0571]

Both have made criticisms of “the mainstream media” or “the fake news media” part of their pitch – an easy way to fire up a partisan crowd. Both demonstrate absolutely zero hygiene in trying to separate unfair, hostile headlines from legitimate scrutiny. The only conclusion, in both cases, is that they do not believe legitimate scrutiny can exist.

Where Trump is brash and bombastic, Corbyn is pious and petulant. He is so convinced of his own righteousness that any criticism prompts self-pitying rage, barely smothered into a clipped “OK?” He is not a pacifist, except where the wars involved are led by America. He is only a lifelong campaigner against racism if you exclude Jews from the category of oppressed groups. He shares a desire for victimhood with the worst parts of the British right, who dismiss any concerns over a no deal Brexit as “Project Fear”. Both appear to expect belief rather than just support.
---------------------
By attacking the media, all three men – Corbyn, Maduro and Trump – know exactly what they are doing. Any journalist’s defence of the profession can be dismissed as special pleading: you would say that, wouldn’t you? It’s a cheap trick that works because everyone hates journalists already. Look at them, sitting there in London, earning a packet, not meeting “real people” (whoever they are). This lazy criticism conflates megabucks contrarian columnists with the majority of the industry, where salaries are low and employment is precarious. There’s a reason that the PR business is full of ex-journalists. Puffery pays better than takedowns.

https://www.newstatesman.com/2019/02/why-jeremy-corbyn-s-media-bashing-trumpian-and-dangerous-democracy

She raises some valid points - I would hazard a guess she is going to have a really torrid time on twitter this weekend because of it.... a woman criticising saint Jeremy.... Oh My!

[Denzil_DC]

1. I'm certainly not in the "Saint Jeremy" camp, but Lewis wants to have her cake and eat it.

Lack of trust in the media is nothing new.

Anyone who's ever tried to take part in a campaign on social justice or any other issue that goes against the establishment grain will be aware of the gatekeeping, the warping, the studied silence on certain issues in favour of what's current and received wisdom in media circles.

Being aware of and critical of that is not being "Trumpian", otherwise the likes of Lewis can simply dismiss any of our concerns in those blanket terms. Failing to address it and pointing the finger at anywhere other than the vested monied interests that dictate our media landscape (from Murdoch to the Barclay Brothers to Russian oligarchs to Viscount Rothermere and beyond) is in fact largely responsible for "Trumpism", inasmuch as it deserves the status of an "-ism", and the atrocious quality of the Brexit debate.

Lewis concedes that the media are worthy of skepticism and need scrutinizing, but her defence against Corbyn's criticisms is:

He should be sentenced to watch every single John Harris video. It suits Corbyn to pretend that op-ed columnists and lobby reporters are the entirety of the political media. There’s no space in his world view for, say, the Victoria Derbyshire show’s moving series on children leaving care, or James Meek’s elegant LRB essays on the future of the NHS and similar subjects. Or indeed our own Anoosh Chakelian’s reports on austerity Britain.

I can't think of a clearer summary of the self-satisfied media bubble. How many in the general public even know who John Harris is, let alone have read any of his articles or watched any of his worthy videos? And the same goes for her other examples.

Nobody fair-minded would deny that there's good journalism out there (funnily enough, I'm finding more decent, hard-hitting journalism in the US nowadays, which hasn't always been the case). It's swamped by the daily array of propagandistic headlines on newspaper racks that are the closest that most of us come to gaining an overview. It's swamped by a BBC that has vastly lost respect in the last few years, running cowed by threats to the licence fee and dominated by Tory placemen and placewomen. It's distracted by the latest squirrel, be it the trivia of what Meghan Markle is up to at the moment, the flash in the pan that has been TIG, or the current feeding frenzy around Labour antisemitism when the evidence is that Labour is not an outlier in that respect and the other mainstream parties have very little to be complacent about.

In the context of Lewis's article, where is her criticism of the gaslighting from the government - in league with, if not led by, the more populist media - over the current Brexit crisis? This is a government that claimed for two years or so that it was carrying out Brexit impact assessments when it wasn't doing any such thing, let alone carrying out any serious planning. Yet I sat in my car an hour ago and heard Liz Truss insist on BBC's Any Questions, unchallenged by anyone, that no deal wasn't a problem because the country's well prepared for Brexit!

The most laughable part of the article is her supposed zinger: "Oh well. I suppose I’d better get used to being an enemy of the people."

Maybe she's missed the constant vitriol aimed at "Bremoaners", the front-page splashes labelling judges literally "enemies of the people", etc. Maybe she's never been part of a scapegoat outgroup? Maybe she's never taken part in an unpopular campaign? I could tell her a few stories.

If she doesn't feel included in that onslaught at the moment, that indicates her privilege.

[T_i_B]

2. A good portion of Labour's media issues at present...

….are a consequence of it's own internal dysfunction. What else do you expect when so many people in Labour are so preoccupied with fighting other people in their own party?

Media reform is very nessessary in this country, but that will require Labour to stop being a circular firing squad.