Vice President Kamala Harris’s recent transformation from second fiddle to president Biden into a competent “joyful warrior” for the Democratic Party is a classic example of big media and big tech creating reality.
But how much of the glowing headlines, inclusive puff pieces and fawning coverage is rooted in reality and how much of it is simply talking points downloaded from the Democratic National Committee?
While it’s no secret that mainstream media have been openly aligned against Donald Trump since before he was elected president in 2016, the pro-Harris narrative-building is becoming too obvious to ignore.
The same media sources that insisted that Joe Biden was strong, forceful and competent, prior to his June 27 debate with Donald Trump, have turned on a dime and put their full-throated support behind Harris, even though she refuses to take meet with or take questions from the press.
Here are nine minutes of Harris without a teleprompter to keep her on script. It’s not surprising that Kamala is keeping her distance from unscripted interviews.
Poll after poll is reported to show Harris gaining support in key battleground states, they claim that she is now favored on “key issues” yet she has published no positions or plans of her own on her campaign website.
Meanwhile, Harris is gracing the cover of Time Magazine while legacy media big tech continue to downplay and throttle information regarding the July 13 assassination attempt against former president Trump in Butler, Ohio.
We know almost nothing about the shooter’s motives, his politics and whether he was truly acting on his own.
The narrative that mainstream media is running with is all about selling us a candidate who is likely to be installed as the Democratic nominee without having won any of her party’s primaries prior to the upcoming convention.
That’s a neat trick for a group that’s allegedly so concerned about “saving our democracy.”
Here’s one more example of how open the narrative management is becoming.
If big media will spin the exact same idea favorably for Harris but put a negative slant on it for Trump, can they be trusted to tell the truth about those who would rig elections?