[rad-green] Corporate Media Find All the Wrong Lessons for US Left in Corbyn’s Defeat

*https://fair.org/home/corporate-media-find-all-the-wrong-lessons-for-us-left-in-corbyns-defeat/
<https://fair.org/home/corporate-media-find-all-the-wrong-lessons-for-us-left-in-corbyns-defeat/>*

*FAIR          DECEMBER 21, 2019*

Corporate Media Find All the Wrong Lessons for US Left in Corbyn’s Defeat *The
only substantial difference between now and 2017 (unacknowledged in
reporting) was that, at the demand of the “moderate” wing of his party,
Corbyn had endorsed a second referendum on leaving the European Union
without taking a position on the question, attempting to straddle the
Brexit issue in a way that alienated both Remain and Leave voters. Just
like the Democrats in 2016, a move to the center proved fatal.*

*By ALAN MACLEOD <https://fair.org/author/alan-macleod/>*

[image: Corporate Media Find All the Wrong Lessons for US Left in Corbyn’s
Defeat]
<https://fair.org/home/corporate-media-find-all-the-wrong-lessons-for-us-left-in-corbyns-defeat/>

   -
   841

   Shares
   - 778
   *Share*
   - 61
   *Share*
   - *Tweet*
   - *Mail*
   - *Print*



[image: Election Focus 2020]
<https://fair.org/topic/election-2020/>Conservative
leader Boris Johnson swept to power in the UK’s December 12 elections,
winning 365 of a possible 650 seats. Labour’s socialist leader Jeremy
Corbyn announced his resignation, after a bitterly disappointing night for
his party.

Across the spectrum, corporate media all came to the same conclusion
regarding the election: Corbyn’s loss spells the end for the US left and a
“crushing defeat” (*New York*, 12/13/19
<https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/corbyn-bernie-sanders-socialism-british-election-2020.html>)
of the discredited policies of socialism. The press was filled with
variations on the same reflexive warning to the Democrats: Don’t go left.

Indeed, *CNN* published three near-identical articles with that message in
one 24-hour span  (12/12/19
<https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/12/politics/meanwhile-in-america-dec-13-intl/index.html>
, 12/13/19
<https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/13/opinions/uk-election-sends-democrats-warning-avlon/index.html>
, 12/13/19
<https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/13/politics/boris-johnson-corbyn-2020/index.html>).
The first, written even as polling stations were still open, suggested that
“the Democratic Party may see a cautionary tale for the US 2020
presidential race,” as Corbyn “promised revolutionary change, a fundamental
overhaul of society, heavy new taxes on the rich and a far bigger role for
the state in the economy. Sound familiar?” It claimed he “took his party
way to the left, leaving the more moderate ground where many voters feel
most comfortable.” Going on to attack Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders
specifically, it suggested that proposing a “state-run healthcare system”
like Britain’s is a “vote killer,” and that Corbyn’s imminent loss implies
Joe Biden or Pete Buttigieg would be a better candidate.

Only a few hours later, John Avalon claimed (*CNN*, 12/13/19
<https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/13/opinions/uk-election-sends-democrats-warning-avlon/index.html>)
the election was a “fierce repudiation” of leftist politics, presenting a
“cautionary tale about the perils of polarization and the predictable
dangers of embracing a far-left leader” who would nationalize key
industries.  *CNN* editor-at-large Chris Cillizza (12/13/19
<https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/13/politics/boris-johnson-corbyn-2020/index.html>)
offered exactly the same opinion, claiming Johnson’s victory should “make
2020 Democrats nervous,” insinuating that embracing progressive politics
and Medicare for All was political suicide, and recommending a more
“moderate” or “pragmatic” candidate than Warren or Sanders.

[image: Collage of headlines warning Democrats not to nominate a leftist
like Jeremy Corbyn.]

The chorus did not stop at *CNN*, however. In fact, surveying just 24 hours
of headlines is enough to understand the message corporate media appears so
keen for you to hear:

   - “Corbyn’s UK Defeat Was Bad News for Sanders, Warren and America’s
   Left” (*NBC News*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/corbyn-s-uk-defeat-was-bad-news-sanders-warren-america-n1101416>
   ),
   - “Labour’s Crushing Loss in Britain Adds to ‘Too Far Left?’ Debate in
   US” (*New York Times*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/13/us/politics/britain-labour-elections-democrats.html>
   ),
   - “The Real Warning in Labour’s Crushing Defeat” (*The Week*, 12/13/19
   <https://theweek.com/articles/884063/real-warning-labours-crushing-defeat>
   ; *Yahoo! News*, 12/13/19
   <https://news.yahoo.com/real-warning-labours-crushing-defeat-185007233.html>
   ),
   - “Boris Johnson’s Win Should Send a Message to AOC, Warren and Sanders”
   (*Fox News*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.foxnews.com/media/varney-uk-election-boris-johnson-victory-crushing-socialists>
   ),
   - “Jeremy Corbyn’s Disastrous Loss Should Be a Warning to US
Leftists” (*Washington
   Examiner*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/jeremy-corbyns-disastrous-loss-should-be-a-warning-to-us-leftists>
   )
   - “Democrats Pick Over Labour Loss in UK as Biden Warns of Moving ‘So
   Far’ Left” (*Guardian*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/13/democrats-labour-biden-bernie-sanders-warren>
   )
   - “In British Election, Lessons for American Liberals: Jeremy Corbyn Was
   Loved by the Left, and He Just Got Trounced” (*Newser*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.newser.com/story/284315/in-britains-election-a-warning-for-american-liberals.html>
   ),
   - “Blowback From UK Election Burns Warren, Sanders: Centrists Warn
   Corbyn Defeat Highlights the Dangers of a Progressive Nominee” (
   *Politico*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/13/uk-election-democratic-primary-johnson-corbyn-warren-sanders-084962>
   ),
   - “Corbyn’s Loss Is a Warning to Sanders, Warren and the Squad About the
   Limited Appeal of Socialism” (*Hot Air*, 12/13/19
   <https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2019/12/13/corbyns-loss-bad-news-sanders-warren-aoc/>
   ),
   - “Corbyn’s Bloodbath Defeat in UK Election Sends ‘Catastrophic Warning’
   to 2020 Dems” (*Fox News*, 12/13/19
   <https://www.foxnews.com/politics/corbyns-bloodbath-defeat-in-uk-election-sends-warning-to-2020-democrats>
   ).

There are a number of serious flaws with the reasoning, however. Few of
these articles note that the UK’s version of Medicare for All, the National
Health Service (NHS), is exceptionally popular, and the number one source
of national pride
<https://www.itv.com/news/2018-06-07/britons-most-proud-of-nhs-survey-finds/>
for
Britons. The NHS is so beloved that more people would countenance privatizing
the army
<https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/05/19/nationalisation-vs-privatisation-public-view>
before
the hospitals. Yet *CNN* still suggests that Corbyn’s support for the
nationalized service contributed to his defeat. Furthermore, Labour’s
leader and its overwhelmingly popular
<https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-manifesto-poll-voters-back-policies-jeremy-corbyn-latest-a7731536.html>
manifesto
were virtually the same as in 2017, when Corbyn led the party to its best
election result
<https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-election-result-vote-share-increased-1945-clement-attlee-a7781706.html>
since
World War II.

[image: Collage of headlines warning Democrats not to nominate a leftist
like Jeremy Corbyn.]

The only substantial difference between now and 2017 (unacknowledged in
reporting) was that, at the demand of the “moderate” wing of his party,
Corbyn had endorsed a second referendum on leaving the European Union
without taking a position on the question, attempting to straddle the
Brexit issue in a way that alienated both Remain and Leave voters. Just
like the Democrats in 2016, a move to the center proved fatal.

Furthermore, none of the articles mentioned that there was another party
who adopted precisely this “centrist,” “moderate,” “pragmatic”—or any other
media code word (*FAIR.org*, 3/23/19
<https://fair.org/home/everyone-washington-supports-by-definition-is-a-moderate-centrist/>
, 8/21/19
<https://fair.org/home/pragmatic-how-corporate-media-praise-dems-who-abandon-progressive-values/>)
meaning “corporate-approved”—position, and they fared poorly as a result.
Jo Swinson, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, presented herself exactly
as such, and suffered the ignominy of losing her seat to a 27-year-old
rookie challenger
<https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/general-election-2019-who-is-amy-callaghan-the-msp-who-beat-jo-swinson-1-5061924>
from
the Scottish National Party.

Nevertheless, there are certainly lessons that American progressives could
learn from Labour’s loss:
*1. Get ready for a coordinated media smear campaign.*

British media managed to turn Corbyn, an elderly, vegetarian, anti-war
pacifist, into a figure of hate
<https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/jeremy-corbyn/news/106687/jeremy-corbyn-most-unpopular>,
presenting him as a terrorist sympathizer
<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/13/jeremy-corbyn-branded-terrorist-sympathiser-church-minister/>,
a Communist spy
<https://observer.com/2018/02/new-report-reveals-jeremy-corbyn-was-a-communist-spy-in-1980s/>
and
a national security threat
<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/10/general-election-jeremy-corbyn-labour-johnson-brexit-news-latest/>.
One academic study
<http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/assets/documents/research/projects/corbyn/Cobyn-Report.pdf>
of
media coverage included an entire section entitled “Delegitimization
through Ridicule, Scorn and Personal Attacks,” finding that 75% of articles
misrepresented Corbyn or his views. And a report
<https://www.lboro.ac.uk/news-events/general-election/report-4/> from
Loughborough University found a relentless and overwhelming anti-Labour and
pro-Conservative message across the British media in the election run up.
Progressives who intend to challenge power can expect similar coordinated
attacks from power’s mouthpieces.
*2. The antisemitism smears are coming.*
[image: Mail: Corbyn Loses the Plot Over Antisemitism]

*Jeremy Corbyn faced a torrent of trumped-up antisemitism charges (Mail,
7/29/19).*

Media managed to convince much of the British public that the lifelong
anti-racism
activist
<https://www.thesouthafrican.com/lifestyle/uk-election-how-opposition-leader-jeremy-corbyn-fought-against-apartheid/>
is
a secret Jew-hater. British historian Mark Curtis noted there had been 1,450
articles <https://twitter.com/markcurtis30/status/1203949403029069824> in
national newspapers linking Corbyn to antisemitism in the past three months
alone. The reason for the allegations, as the *Washington Post* noted
in a since-deleted
tweet <https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1199434034021126147>, was
“because of [his] strong statements on Palestinian rights.”

The barrage succeeded. When media researchers asked
<https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/bad-news-for-labour-antisemitism-the-party-and-public-belief-special-offer-to-jvl-supporters/>
the
public what percentage of Labour members faced official complaints over
antisemitism, the average guess was 34%. The actual answer is 0.1%
<https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/10/labour-party-antisemitism-claims-jeremy-corbyn>.
When questioned why they were off by such a massive factor, respondents
replied that they chose a number that seemed commensurate with the media
coverage.

This tactic will be far more difficult to stick on somebody like Sanders
who speaks with such a stereotypical New York Jewish accent
<https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a35w3z/bernie-sanders-angry-accent-jewish-brooklyn>.
Yet media, seeing how effective it was in discrediting a progressive in the
UK, have already begun attempting to smear those around him (e.g.,
*Spectator*, 12/5/19
<https://spectator.us/bernie-sanders-leans-anti-semitism/>; *Commentary*,
12/13/19
<https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/liberals-democrats/bernie-sanders-has-a-big-jeremy-corbyn-problem/>
).

Of particular note is a *Washington Examiner* article (12/13/19
<https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/bernie-sanders-campaign-has-an-anti-semitism-problem>)
claiming Sanders’ campaign is “the most antisemitic in decades.” Its
author, Tiana Lowe, calls infamous fascist troll Milo Yiannopoulos “awesome
<https://twitter.com/Peterzinho33/status/1205761297649811456/photo/1>”
and regularly
boasts <https://twitter.com/dancohen3000/status/1205826080642342914> of her
pride in her Nazi collaborator grandfather, whose organization participated
in the Holocaust that killed Sanders’ close relatives. Nevertheless, the
attacks, if not the substance of the allegations, must be taken seriously.
*3. Solidarity with developing countries will not be tolerated.*

Corbyn, like Sanders, immediately condemned the US-backed coup against Evo
Morales in Bolivia, an action that drew the ire of an outraged pro-coup
media
<https://fair.org/home/the-bolivian-coup-is-not-a-coup-because-us-wanted-it-to-happen/>
 (London *Independent*, 11/11/19
<https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/evo-morales-bolivia-protests-corbyn-president-police-labour-socialism-a9198256.html>
; *Daily Express*, 11/11/19
<https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1202967/jeremy-corbyn-news-bolivia-president-latest-evo-morales-election>),
who accused him of putting “Marxist solidarity ahead of democracy” (London
*Times*, 11/12/19
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/evo-morales-anger-at-jeremy-corbyns-support-for-ousted-bolivian-leftwinger-xjmm8jgcz>).
Both men have been denounced for their connections, imaginary or otherwise,
to Venezuela (*FAIR.org*, 3/5/19
<https://fair.org/home/venezuela-baiting-how-media-keep-anti-imperialist-dissent-in-check/>).
Sanders’ history
<https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/07/bernie-sanders-central-america-sandinista>
of
solidarity with Nicaragua in the 1980s will be presented as support for a
dictatorship. The left will have to have a response.
*4. Building a movement to reach elderly voters will be crucial.*
[image: How Did Britain Vote?]

*Chart: Lord Ashcroft Polling (12/13/19
<https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/12/how-britain-voted-and-why-my-2019-general-election-post-vote-poll/>)
(AB–DE represent socioeconomic classes–from managerial to unskilled labor.)*

The Labour movement has managed to build an impressive network of
alternative and social media countering the corporate press, reaching
millions of young people, who voted 3 to 1
<https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/12/how-britain-voted-and-why-my-2019-general-election-post-vote-poll/>
in
favor of Corbyn. However, there was little concerted effort to reach
elderly voters, who still largely rely on traditional media for news,
information and opinion. This contributed to only 18%
<https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/12/how-britain-voted-and-why-my-2019-general-election-post-vote-poll/>
of
those over 65 voting Labour, and the retired vote proved to be the backbone
of the Tory victory. A similar phenomenon
<https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_121019.pdf/>
is
happening in the US, where Sanders is the runaway favorite among the
under-50s, but polls at just 5% among elderly voters, despite his
commitment to the kind of social safety net programs they depend upon.
Connecting with Boomers and Generation X, who use the Internet and social
media for news far less
<https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/> than
younger Americans, will require a specially geared effort.
*5. Don’t unquestioningly accept advice from centrists.*
[image: UK Election: 2019 vote compared to 2017 parliamentary and Brexit
vote]

*Chart: Lord Ashcroft Polling (12/13/19
<https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/12/how-britain-voted-and-why-my-2019-general-election-post-vote-poll/>)*

Under enormous pressure from the “centrist” wing of his party and the
media, Corbyn took a “on the one hand/on the other hand” approach to
Brexit, the  dominant issue of the campaign. Rather than arguing that
leaving the European Union was a necessary response to undemocratic,
austerity-loving Eurocrats—or, contrariwise, that Brexit must be opposed as
a xenophobic scapegoating of immigrants, the British equivalent of “build
the wall”—Labour was induced to split the difference, promising to
renegotiate a break with the EU and then asking voters once again whether
they wanted to leave or not, while Corbyn professed neutrality on the
question. Following the media’s insistent advice that the safe path is
always somewhere in the middle, the position called to mind the line
attributed to Groucho Marx: “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like
them… well, I have others.”

Virtually every seat Labour lost was a “Leave” constituency, suggesting
that Corbyn was hurt by Labour’s attempts to “moderate.” Turnout also
declined from 2017 to 2019, and there are indications that the decline was
greater in constituencies with more young voters—by far the most pro-Labour
demographic group. All of the centrist defectors from the Conservatives
*and* Labour lost their seats, as did the pro-EU, stop-Brexit-at-any-cost
Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson—illustrating that the media center and
the public center are not always the same.

*****

While there certainly are many things that progressives can learn from
Labour’s defeat, the herd of independent minds in the corporate press can
see only one lesson, the same one they have been sending the left for
decades (see *Extra!*, 9/92 <https://fair.org/home/conventional-wisdom/>,
 1–2/95 <https://fair.org/extra/move-to-the-right/>, 6/04
<https://fair.org/home/move-over8212over-and-over/>, 7–8/06
<https://fair.org/home/move-over8212over-and-over/>, 1–2/07
<https://fair.org/home/victorious-dems-lectured-by-media-establishment/>;
*FAIR.org*, 11/7/08
<https://fair.org/take-action/media-advisories/media-tell-obama-dont-be-a-lefty-like-clinton/>
, 3/16/10
<https://fair.org/uncategorized/11-out-of-12-pundits-agree-obama-must-move-to-the-right/>
, 8/21/19
<https://fair.org/home/pragmatic-how-corporate-media-praise-dems-who-abandon-progressive-values/>),
suggesting the advice may not be entirely in good faith.

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sid-l/CACKppcy8hZ7wwFEjKqGH_3L7mSFr9vs9Q%3DYLYhvCVprzODcoLg%40mail.gmail.com.

---
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>