Although the discussion of socialism in the article says nothing new nor
even repeats anything important, it cites a significant media development:
David Auerbach of Slate reported, “Online social networking has
allowed Sanders supporters to reinforce one another’s beliefs, so that
the general shutout of Sanders by the mainstream media — and even a good
deal of the leftist media — has allowed Sanders to survive where he
would have suffocated even in 2008.” Perhaps slightly overstated, at
least recently.
Is the obverse that you get when you substitute Trump for Sanders also true?
How significant is agitation by means of social networking? To be
practical, what would happen to Sanders if he did not spend heavily on
advertising? And to Trump if the mass media did not give him such
inordinate exposure?
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
