In the era of mass media, “populist” movements are being exposed to increasingly larger and more diverse demographics of American citizens.   Perhaps the prime example of this was the election of Barack Obama, and what liberals have interpreted to be a referendum for a liberal platform.  But are these movements, including the current rise of citizen ire against healthcare, really populist movements in the sense that the movement embodies the will of the common man?  Or is it really just that a subsection of typically silent ideologues are abruptly awakened by a political stimulus?

The answer is clearly the latter.  The mass media attempted to portray the Obama election win as a victory for the American people in its entirety.  Admittedly, this was easily accomplished when there were vocal Obama supporters dancing in the streets shortly following his historic election.  And indeed, President Obama won the election in a clear (compared to previous years) manner.  However, statistically the election was no landslide.  The truth, however obfuscated by media perception, was that close to half of Americans actually voted against Barack Obama.  Again, the mass media chose to focus almost singularly on those individuals dancing in the streets on the eve of the election, highlighting the populistic attributes of his win, not the divisive elements.  His election, while notable and historic, was certainly no populist uprising.  What made it appear to be so was the artificial amplification of ecstatic liberals and some moderates by media outlets.

Turning to today, there is a contemporary “populist” movement in the works.  This time, conservatives and some moderates (the exact flip from the Obama election) are broadcasting their own message.   As with the Obama election, to call the current healthcare rebuttal a true populist movement assumes too much - but that certainly did little to stop the mass media from trumpeting the liberal counterpart from 2008.  Is there a specific reason, then, that the media continues to focus on degrading this conservative healthcare uprising as being nothing more than a staged lobbyist act, when they so willingly ignored the involvement of dubious groups such as ACORN during the 2008 liberal “populist” movement?  Now that conservatives are broadcasting their message, where is the media amplification?

It’s also arguable that the current conservative uprising resonates more with the American people as a whole than the widely acclaimed liberal success in 2008.  For instance, only 36 percent of people think that President Obama’s healthcare plan is a good idea, making it easy to see why constituents across the country, even in blue states like Massachusetts, are making their displeasure widely known.  That’s quite different from the relatively even split during the presidential election.

Of course, all of this is largely consistent with the oft-termed “love affair” between the media and President Obama.  This has been noted by Hillary Clinton during the Democratic primaries, and by most people who watch the news with a certain level of awareness.  So the question remains - why is this?  Furthermore, what is there to be done?

The answer regarding the love affairs and impartial coverage of “populist” movements is nebulous, and possibly not attainable within the confines of this article.  Is it something nefarious?  Perhaps.  Maybe liberals long ago targeted mass media as the most influential way to sway voter opinion, and began to stack the deck.  After all, the placement of a favorable article can be a message in itself.  While many of the conservative block might believe this, it seems unlikely due to the raw audacity and scope of the undertaking.  The real answer - I hope - is far less conniving.

With respect to taking action against such bias (on either side, whether your anger lies with Fox News or MSNBC), I previously wrote an article about suing news organizations, specifically in regard to unfair bias.  Needless to say, MoveOn.org has attempted suing with Fox News, without ever succeeding.  Fortunately, mass media technology has also opened the world to sites like this one, in which a concerned citizen can read news from five different perspectives and biases, allowing them to hollistically form their own opinion.  Perhaps that’s the crux of the matter; once you know the extent of media distortion, you can move actively to mitigate that distortion by proactively seeking the news yourself.  We at The PULSE Review humbly hope that you find us useful in your endeavor.