We’re exactly two days away from the USA’s 2016 presidential election – that’s two days away from finding out whether the demagogue or the feminist wins the electoral college.
The past year has been a whirlwind of mix-ups for the US media, namely the Liberals.
While sources such as Fox already have a reputation of Republican bias, Liberal sources such as Mic.com pride themselves on bringing objective information to the table. They’ve not delivered on their promise this year.
Hillary Clinton’s running was only a matter of time, but when Donald Trump announced his candidacy, voters and foreigners were somewhat bemused.
Trump’s chances of reaching the Oval Office were slim, and made for convenient laughing-stock as the media tried to make politics attractive reading for the general public.
Every outrageous comment by the Republican candidate was reiterated or photo-shopped onto his pictures on social media. People thought they were raising awareness on his questionable agenda but, of course, they did quite the opposite.
Mr Trump was served publicity on a silver platter. He explained how what we thought was debilitating his campaign was actually achieving what he’d wanted in the first place, according to Time Magazine:
“Every time somebody says I made a mistake, they do the polls and my numbers go up,” Trump says. “So I guess I haven’t made a mistake.”
Naturally, things got serious and readers expressed a desire for information on the candidates for the Democratic and the Republican parties. Comedic news sources were ready to oblige.
Although comedians shed light on the paradoxes of Trump’s ideologies as understood by his supporters, they portrayed Mr Trump and his voters as clueless creatures. This did not bring credibility to Democratic voters.
Rather than discuss Secretary Clinton’s past and present political mistakes (which have now become textbook arguments for non-supporters), the media focused on portraying Donald Trump as a rash personality unfit for US presidency.
An immediate defence to this issue is to list the numerous times Secretary Clinton’s opponent has attacked her based on her gender and her husband Bill Clinton, a former President of the United States.
Unquestionably, the Republican candidate has said things which should never be expressed by the leader of the Free World.
In retaliation to Mr Trump’s bigoted insults, Secretary Clinton called half of his supporters “the basket of deplorables.” Neither figure’s apology seemed sincere to the opposing party.
Now, after a year of insults and leaked documents, the people of the United States of America are going to choose their president for the next four years. Their choice, while it will be educated by facts and campaigns, will be affected by the media’s political battle.
With the more respectable media sources turning on the business mogul in the past few months, spectators may consider it a last attempt to highlight the obvious differences between the candidates.
They may, in fact, have turned completely on their promise of objective reporting in order to show the American people which choice would provide the US with a better future. Whether it is up to them to educate with carefully selected items is another question entirely. One whose answer might serve as a lesson for the elections in 2020.