Perhaps George Orwell was nearly correct in his novel "1984"; simply substitute his vision of English socialism with American corporatism and you have the current conundrum in the United States.
Several people in the media promised to cover this story a nd have since reneged on that promise (or never really intended to cover it) most likely due to corporate pressure, threats from advertisers, competing political groups and financial conflicts of interest. This cowardice by the media is no different than the behavior of the skulking politicians purchased by unions, corporations and the wealthy to do their exclusive bidding regardless of the cost to the country. In partnership with the corporate media, the politicians have methodically sacrificed our republican-democracy to accumulate money and power for a tiny group of people on the left and right. Now that money is no longer merely property but protected speech, the accumulation of wealth and power for this handful of people has become completely unrestricted while remaining secret. Thus, not only can they legally bribe and purchase politicians, they are not required to disclose who is taking and receiving the bribes. A perfect storm of corruption.
Perhaps George Orwell was nearly correct in his novel "1984"; simply substitute his vision of English socialism with American corporatism and you have the current conundrum in the United States. Maybe Orwell was completely correct and the dystopian political system and society he described in "1984" was the successor to corporatism. Partially in response to changing demographics and massive wealth disparity, we are witnessing a transition in our political process from a weak central government, controlled by corporations and the wealthy, to something more oppressive, more desperate, with additional oligarchical traits and characteristics reigned by even fewer people.
As bad as these actors are, the members of the media and the communications monopolies they represent are squarely to blame for the demise of our democracy. They fail to report the truth because they are "part & parcel" of the story. Orwell called it "double-think" or the ability to hold and express two contradictory views at the same time by means of collective self-deception. You know "A" is false and I know "A" is false but we tell each other it is true so often that we begin to believe it. The media's attacks upon the PACS and SuperPACS that funnel money into their bank accounts; hypocritical and feigned denouncements of "Citizens United" and crony capitalism are all concepts that are embraced by the corporate media in reality. In this world: 2+2=5 and if repeated enough you will believe it. The unlimited money being channeled to and greedily accepted by the media to control political debate and power in this country is destroying the foundation of our nation. This money determines what stories will be covered and how the stories will be spinned. It's no longer only about ratings; it's about power, control of the national discussion and the sale of books, entertainment properties and other products owned by the media conglomerates. Ethics simply do not apply. Thus, you might ask, if the members of the media oppose PAC money as a corrupting influence on democracy, why do they readily accept it? Because the members of the media may say they are against PAC money and still take it as long as 2+2=5 and you believe it.
The 99% Working Group