The debate about the views of Sir Roger Scruton has been framed in terms of "Left" versus "Right". Stand a little way back from the immediate debate and it is obvious that something else is going on. What is happening is yet another media frenzy which has as its objective the vilification of a group of people so that not only their views but their very being is dismissed as evil. This flexing of the muscles of the media industry has been growing in intensity over the past half century.Perhaps, if the media industry were neutral, then flexing its muscle would be more acceptable. But the media industry is not neutral. The media industry is a massive, rapidly growing industry with its own priorities.Presenters, journalists, comedians and producers in the media are exposed. Not only do
John considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
J. writes AI: Saviour or Nemesis?
J. writes EU Racism is far worse than UK
J. writes Brexit and the Media
Perhaps, if the media industry were neutral, then flexing its muscle would be more acceptable. But the media industry is not neutral. The media industry is a massive, rapidly growing industry with its own priorities.
Presenters, journalists, comedians and producers in the media are exposed. Not only do they work freelance in an insecure profession but their work is on view to future employers as never before because it is stored online in perpetuity. This has produced a group of people for whom pleasing their bosses is the major objective of everything they do. It is imperative for media producers to sense the current climate of corporate media opinion and cluster around it. Media employees have formed a group for their own safety and advancement that has a shared ethos and politics - that of their employers.
The large media corporations have several objectives in common. They do not want borders, without borders they can sell their product globally. The media also require a single global language and culture for ease of communication. Media is a numbers game in which the money earned depends on clicks, viewer and user numbers. Few industries can benefit as rapidly and greatly as the media from increased reach. The media do not want to pay taxes or have investment hindered and so support the unconstrained movement of capital. Globalisation is good for the Media and Extremist Internationalism is very good indeed.
Media corporations are not a political party. They are not involved in a debate. They have corporate needs to achieve profits for their industry. This poses a problem for their sycophantic employees: how can they suppress ideas and events that damage the media agenda without drawing attention to the fact that it is their own needs that they are advancing? They cannot argue the case because this would expose their agenda. Their approach is to create an aura of evil around any views that oppose the Extremist Internationalist agenda. To achieve this aim they use Identity Politics and have modified the term "racist" to mean anyone who opposes them.
This brings us back to Sir Roger Scruton. The Chinese market is the principle focus of expansion for many media companies so instead of discussing how Chinese Tyranny homogenises Chinese culture the Media producers quote Scruton out of context as saying that Chinese people are identical and then demonise him for racism. Instead of discussing how the Balkans had been the front line of a centuries old conflict Scruton is quoted as giving a blank cheque to Hungarian measures against migration, hence racist. And so on.
The demonisation of opponents as evil is not democratic or moral. It is usually a sign of powers in play who are not interested in political debate and have a clear idea of what is required for their own power outside of the democratic system. Demonisation has been the tool of anti-democrats such as Communists and National Socialists once they have control of the media. The sort of people for whom discussion of the Jews as people was unnecessary, they were just an evil menace that had to be removed, for whom supporting free speech was evil because it could only be an assault on Communist power.
How do we tackle a Media Industry that has gone rogue, especially when that industry represents the views of multinational corporations generally? How can we stop Corporatism when it controls the broadcast and social media?
In the UK the first step must be to remove the regulation of media news and current affairs content from Ofcom which is a Media industry body that simply rubber stamps Media industry friendly content and fails to tackle the suppression of news at all.
The political spectrum is now not "Left" versus "Right", it is Corporatism versus Freedom. The Corporate Elite and their cronies have almost defeated the forces of democracy and freedom. We must fight them. Unfortunately when the fourth estate goes rotten a democracy is in trouble. If you wonder why the broadcast Media never receive criticism reflect on this: what journalist or comedian will bite the hand that feeds them, what politician will deprive themselves of publicity and what Media company will criticise itself in public?