Since this is Thomas Frank, he probably means American rather than Soviet propaganda. But in the Obama era, reading the media became a surreal exercise in Pravdaism. Media coverage was not just biased, it was the talking points of one side, its narrative, loudly recited while pretending that no other point of view could or should exist.
Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station. Here’s what it consisted of:
Hillary was virtually without flaws. She was a peerless leader clad in saintly white, a super-lawyer, a caring benefactor of women and children, a warrior for social justice.
Her scandals weren’t real.
The economy was doing well / America was already great.
Working-class people weren’t supporting Trump.
And if they were, it was only because they were botched humans. Racism was the only conceivable reason for lining up with the Republican candidate.How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach?
Frank is well on the left, but he's quite correct that such an approach can become irritating and infuriating. The media sought to manufacture a consensus. It has succeeded at that in the recent past. Gay marriage is one example. But here is failed dramatically and miserably.
Thomas Frank's interest in this, like Michael Moore's is obvious. After this latest defeat, there might just be a market in left-wingers who can explain the white working class to Democrats. Though there should have been one of those after the last election. It's entirely possible that the Dems will double down on their rainbow coalition and throw in some more welfare proposals.