Will the Press Never Be the Same After the 2012 Presidential Election?

You constantly hear the “media” being labeled as liberal or, occasionally, in the case of Fox News, conservative in bias.  However, we would like to suggest to the American public that the 2012 Presidential Election proves that the “media” as a whole actually is most biased towards itself.  What do we mean by that?  Election seasons are tremendous news extravaganzas, and all the major networks and news outlets plan for months to get ready to have the best election coverage.  But do they also conspire to make the news more compelling?

Election coverage is big business, make no mistake. Few events bring the American people together in front of their television sets like a presidential election year.

Going into this year, few people predicted that President Barack Obama would have any trouble defeating his Republican challenger, whomever it may be, and marching to a second term.  This prediction that was shared by millions of Americans was based on different factors.  First of all, the Republican field seemed very segmented, and none of the likely candidates seemed to be formidable foes for the incumbent.  Yet, as the election approached, suddenly, the media warmed up to Mitt Romney.  And so did the polls.

The polls are one of the most ridiculous tools used to report the news in history.  Just the past month, we have seen many different polls, all indicating completely different things.  Some show Romney with a slight lead here or there, some show the opposite to be true, and most show a dead heat.  But how did it manage to go from what everyone thought would be an easy win to a hotly contested election?

Our suggestion:  did it really?

The media might tend to lean one way or another; we are not debating that in this article.  But when the chips are down, it leans mostly toward whatever benefits itself the most.  The media has sensationalized this election to make their 24/7 coverage more dramatic, more compelling, and most importantly, more watched.  More eyes means more money for the networks.  A ho-hum election year to the media is like flushing money down a toilet.  They need controversy.  They need the battle lines to be drawn.  They want nothing more than to build the tension up to a boiling point leading into Tuesday.  But is there a risk in these tactics?

What we at Common Sense Conspiracy want to suggest is that people need to watch how this turns out.  And remember the press and all those polls.  If one candidate or the other marches to an easy victory and the whole thing has been called by six or seven that night, then shouldn’t we the people know once and for all that we cannot trust what the media is telling us?  If they will lie about something as important as the leader of our country, then they will lie about anything.  And to do it not even to try to sway it, but just to gain more money from it.  They don’t even have a real conspiracy to make things go one way or the other, except their own.  For that, they can reach across all party lines.  There is no liberal, no conservative, but capitalism that rules the day.

So, let’s recap.  If the media has been telling us the truth, then Tuesday should be one of the most interesting elections of all time.  It should go down to the wire, and most of us should be forced to go to sleep not knowing who wins.  It could even come down to recounts and legal challenges like it did in 2000, no doubt a ratings bonanza for the networks.  If it is not even close, no matter who comes out on top, then it’s time for us to realize that the major ways that we get news are not authentic.  We need to remember not to believe everything we hear and continue to seek alternative news sources.

It’s not just a day of reckoning for Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.  It’s a day of reckoning for the media also.  If you were up to no good, everyone is about to know about it.