The pattern is unmistakable in both the UK and US – and I apologise for sounding like a stuck record. Liberal mainstream media prove over and over again their aversion to telling us the news straight. They conspire \u2013 I can think of no fairer word \u2013 with the political elites in Washington and London\u00a0to spin and subvert stories damaging to their mutual interests, even when the facts are driving real events in an entirely different direction.<\/p>\n
A perfect illustration is the story of the Democratic\u00a0party’s leaked emails, which reveal that the national leadership was actively seeking to swing\u00a0the primaries battle in Hillary Clinton’s favour by harming Bernie Sanders. One leaked email (there are more to come, apparently) shows officials trying to highlight Sanders’ “faith” \u2013 it is unclear whether the goal was to play up his Jewishness or his supposed atheism, or both.<\/p>\n
As Sanders says, this is “outrageous” activity by the Democratic National Committee\u00a0(DNC), even if it is hardly surprising. He, and we, knew it was happening during the primaries, even if it wasn’t being reported, just as we know the British parliamentary Labour party has been trying to undermine its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, since he was elected last summer, even if everyone denies it. The difference with the\u00a0Democratic party scandal\u00a0is we now have the proof.<\/p>\n
It is worth examining the Guardian’s coverage of this affair. It’s like a masterclass in Pravda-style journalism – and entirely illustrative of how the Guardian is not reporting news but framing debates to protect its political interests: they have been rock solid behind the status-quo candidacy of Clinton rather than Sanders (“let’s focus on the fact she’s woman rather than that she’s the spokeswoman for the military-industrial complex”), just as they seem ready to back\u00a0anyone for British PM as long as it’s not Jeremy Corbyn, including Theresa May.<\/p>\n
The DNC email leak story broke badly for the Guardian, with the first reports arriving Sunday UK time, when the paper does not publish. A bland Associated Press report<\/a> appears to be the first time the story runs on its website, too early for responses from the main actors.<\/p>\n