How the Corporate Media will help the DLC in the next election

Most Democrats barely know the name of their Representative. They will start paying attention a few months before the election. Most will have never heard of most of the candidates, or have much knowledge of who is backing them, where they come from, or where their campaign contributions are coming from. The Corporate Media will introduce them to the candidates.

The DLC candidates will be called "moderate" "popular" and "experienced". Progressive candidates, when mentioned at all, will be called "controversial", "far left", and "very liberal".

Issues will be discussed only in soundbites and labels. The Corporate Media will focus on the personalities of the candidates, their looks, how they dress, and the stage props they use.

Just as in advertizing, they will sell sizzle, not steak. Without "taking sides" or being specific, they will build a positive image of the DLC candidate, and a negative one of the progressive candidate.

Any ideas how to counter it?

...uh, with emails, I mean...yeah, that's the ticket...I meant with emails...

for treason.

that's Democratic.

Are you a political strategist?

Activists should join PDA or DFA or Progressive majority. Then they should also join the local party organization and do their best to make sure those DLC candidates don't become the nominees.

Those of us here at DU should forward this on as well.

You are absolutely right that our war-complicit media is painting the DLCers as "moderates" and "experienced", when nothing they have done in my opinion would qualify as being "moderate", unless caving in and/or siding with the Republicans could be considered "moderate".

What defines moderate anyway? The term in and of itself, is vague, with the goal posts of an accurate definition changing with whoemver you are talking to. I guess one could make Adolph Hitler a moderate with the 'right' spin and/or individual talking him up.

In addition, the term "experienced" is a relative term, especially when you are talking politics. What kind of "experience" are we talking about? There are good, qualifying experiences and there are ineffectual, limited experiences that have inspired more negative overall change than positive.

I like what you wrote. Its concise, insightful information and is a good summary/head's up for people to look out for when they are watching "Meet the Press" or any other show in that vein.

Why fix it if it ain't broke?

;-)