This year’s presidential election has featured propaganda like nothing the world has seen since Nazi Germany. While the major media outlets claim to offer a balanced view, their corporate profiteering and self-interested nature predispose major media companies and therefore the individual journalists who comprise them to show a clear bias toward the candidate who will best represent their interests. Public beware: the master of propaganda would be proud of the job media is doing this election year.

How skewed reporting affects public opinion

Examples abound, but let’s look at a recent example from the first presidential debate. #Donald Trump is under tax audit. #Hillary Clinton challenged Trump to release his tax records. Despite what any tax lawyer would recommend, Trump agreed to release the return immediately on condition of Hillary releasing 30,000 emails she deleted from a private server after being subpoenaed for them by the U.S. Congress. These are the facts. So, how were they reported? Unanimously, the major media condemned Trump for not releasing his tax return. Period. No mention was made of his opponent’s refusal to comply with his conditional promise.

Why the media is afraid of Trump

The major overt reason so many media companies want to prevent a Trump presidency at all costs is his announcement to more strictly enforce libel laws. This would mean that a journalist or organization could be more readily sued for writing untruthful and maliciously damaging articles. But behind this is the more subtle reason of why a news organization would want to slander a public figure such as Donald Trump in the first place.

Multi-billionaires like Wal-Mart inheritress Alice Walton, media-mogul Michael Bloomberg, businessman Mark Cuban, investor Warren Buffett and other members of the super-rich have flocked to support Clinton’s campaign. Indeed, 75% of contributions come from large individual donations, such as attendees of the $353,000 per couple fundraiser at George Clooney’s house last April. With her campaign fundraising nearing half a billion dollars, that is a great number of very wealthy individuals who have a stake in getting Clinton elected. Many of these wealthy individuals are the same business owners that support media through paid advertising. As the old adage goes, it would be unwise to bite the hand that feeds. This is ignoring the highly probable collusion and extortion wealthy individuals could place upon a media organization that refused to fall in line with the program, or the potential bribery of same organizations. Considering the source of her funding, the likelihood of Hillary Clinton protecting the interests of her large donors before the interests of the proletariat seems about as obvious as a sunrise over the Atlantic on a clear day. The media protects her by monopolizing its version of the truth to serve the rich who support media.

As national socialist Adolf Hitler wrote in his book "Mein Kampf" in 1926, “Propaganda tries to force a doctrine on the whole people…Propaganda works on the general public from the standpoint of an idea and makes them ripe for the victory of this idea.” So the next time you listen to the news or hear a media expert say something that convinces you of the victory of the idea: Hillary Clinton should be President, not Donald Trump, ask yourself, “Am I the ripe fruit of propaganda, or does my independent reason and consideration of facts from both sides actually support this conclusion?” #2016 Presidential Debates