I came across this quote from Jonathan Swift
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffeehouse, for the voice of the kingdom.and wanted to verify it and understand its context. It is from the above work.
My interest is that Swift's statement so closely echoes the argument I have long made, that part of the institutional challenge for the modern mainstream media goes beyond the fact that they are far more left-leaning than the population at large. I think a substantial contributor to the MSM dissociation from the country and incapacity to comprehend the concerns and reality of the rest of the nation is a function of their concentration and geographical locations.
New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago - These are the headquarters of the major news divisions with some satellites in Atlanta, San Francisco, Boston and a few others. The upshot is that the journalists are clustered together in a handful of social environments which are isolated from everywhere else and distinctly different from the rest of the nation.
Income inequality, perceived poverty, diversity, public infrastructure collapse, social disfunction, crime, race, hard-left ideologies, emigration, single party dominance (i.e. Democrats), gentrification, LGBT issues, housing cost crisis - These are all far more present and concentrated in these urban environments than anywhere else. If reporters primarily report what they see and experience, then their reporting will be dominated by these issues which are either alien to the rest of the country, or much more muted.
Yes, the mainstream media are nearly uniform in their left-leaning, and yes they tend to be harder left than most. But perhaps this is caused by, or at least amplified by, their geographical location and their urban hot house issues. Which sure seems like Swift's:
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffeehouse, for the voice of the kingdom.The more full context?
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffeehouse, for the voice of the kingdom. The city coffeehouses have been for some years filled with people, whose fortunes depend upon the Bank, East-India, or some other stock. Every new fund to these, is like a new mortgage to a usurer, whose compassion for a young heir, is exactly the same with that of a stockjobber to the landed gentry. At the court end of the town, the like places of resort are frequented either by men out of place, and consequently enemies to the present ministry, or by officers of the army: no wonder then if the general cry, in all such meetings, be against any peace, either with Spain or without; which, in other words, is no more than this; that discontented men desire another change of ministry; that soldiers would be glad to keep their commissions; and that the creditors have money still, and would have the debtors borrow on at the old extorting rate, while they have any security to give.This is all strikingly contemporary. The categories of pleaders to the State for special privileges have changed somewhat but the dynamics are recognizably the same.
In Swift's day it was soldiers of rank wanting wars to continue for their own employment; bankers wanting to exploit their borrowers; special pleaders seeking the largesse of the State. Well, maybe it hasn't changed quite so much. But basically, urban insiders want to shape the national agenda to suit their interests over recognition that the rest of the nation, which pays, has different goals.
Cities are full of vested interests who seek the continuance of their state provided sinecures.
Swift's argument was well received and helped build support for peace negotiations. The will of the people overcame the coffee-house special pleaders.
No comments:
Post a Comment