Corporate Media Is Drawing All the Wrong Lessons From Corbyn's Defeat
Jeremy Corbyn is stepping down as Labour leader after his defeat in the
December elections.
Jeremy Corbyn is stepping down as Labour leader after his defeat in the
December elections. Andy Miah / Flickr
Conservative leader Boris Johnson swept to power in the UK's December 12
elections, winning 365 of a possible 650 seats. Labour's socialist leader
Jeremy Corbyn announced his resignation, after a bitterly disappointing
night for his party.
Across the spectrum, corporate media all came to the same conclusion
regarding the election: Corbyn's loss spells the end for the US left and a
"crushing defeat" (New York, 12/13/19) of the discredited policies of
socialism. The press was filled with variations on the same reflexive
warning to the Democrats: Don't go left.
Indeed, CNN published three near-identical articles with that message in one
24-hour span (12/12/19, 12/13/19, 12/13/19). The first, written even as
polling stations were still open, suggested that "the Democratic Party may
see a cautionary tale for the US 2020 presidential race," as Corbyn
"promised revolutionary change, a fundamental overhaul of society, heavy new
taxes on the rich and a far bigger role for the state in the economy. Sound
familiar?" It claimed he "took his party way to the left, leaving the more
moderate ground where many voters feel most comfortable." Going on to attack
Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders specifically, it suggested that
proposing a "state-run healthcare system" like Britain's is a "vote killer,"
and that Corbyn's imminent loss implies Joe Biden or Pete Buttigieg would be
a better candidate.
Only a few hours later, John Avalon claimed (CNN, 12/13/19) the election was
a "fierce repudiation" of leftist politics, presenting a "cautionary tale
about the perils of polarization and the predictable dangers of embracing a
far-left leader" who would nationalize key industries. CNN editor-at-large
Chris Cillizza (12/13/19) offered exactly the same opinion, claiming
Johnson's victory should "make 2020 Democrats nervous," insinuating that
embracing progressive politics and Medicare for All was political suicide,
and recommending a more "moderate" or "pragmatic" candidate than Warren or
Sanders.
The chorus did not stop at CNN, however. In fact, surveying just 24 hours of
headlines is enough to understand the message corporate media appears so
keen for you to hear:
."Corbyn's UK Defeat Was Bad News for Sanders, Warren and America's Left"
(NBC News, 12/13/19),
."Labour's Crushing Loss in Britain Adds to 'Too Far Left?' Debate in US"
(New York Times, 12/13/19),
."The Real Warning in Labour's Crushing Defeat" (The Week, 12/13/19; Yahoo!
News, 12/13/19),
."Boris Johnson's Win Should Send a Message to AOC, Warren and Sanders" (Fox
News, 12/13/19),
."Jeremy Corbyn's Disastrous Loss Should Be a Warning to US Leftists"
(Washington Examiner, 12/13/19)
."Democrats Pick Over Labour Loss in UK as Biden Warns of Moving 'So Far'
Left" (Guardian, 12/13/19)
."In British Election, Lessons for American Liberals: Jeremy Corbyn Was
Loved by the Left, and He Just Got Trounced" (Newser, 12/13/19),
."Blowback From UK Election Burns Warren, Sanders: Centrists Warn Corbyn
Defeat Highlights the Dangers of a Progressive Nominee" (Politico,
12/13/19),
."Corbyn's Loss Is a Warning to Sanders, Warren and the Squad About the
Limited Appeal of Socialism" (Hot Air, 12/13/19),
."Corbyn's Bloodbath Defeat in UK Election Sends 'Catastrophic Warning' to
2020 Dems" (Fox News, 12/13/19).
There are a number of serious flaws with the reasoning, however. Few of
these articles note that the UK's version of Medicare for All, the National
Health Service (NHS), is exceptionally popular, and the number one source of
national pride for Britons. The NHS is so beloved that more people would
countenance privatizing the army before the hospitals. Yet CNN still
suggests that Corbyn's support for the nationalized service contributed to
his defeat. Furthermore, Labour's leader and its overwhelmingly popular
manifesto were virtually the same as in 2017, when Corbyn led the party to
its best election result since World War II.
The only substantial difference between now and 2017 (unacknowledged in
reporting) was that, at the demand of the "moderate" wing of his party,
Corbyn had endorsed a second referendum on leaving the European Union
without taking a position on the question, attempting to straddle the Brexit
issue in a way that alienated both Remain and Leave voters. Just like the
Democrats in 2016, a move to the center proved fatal.
Furthermore, none of the articles mentioned that there was another party who
adopted precisely this "centrist," "moderate," "pragmatic"-or any other
media code word (FAIR.org, 3/23/19, 8/21/19) meaning
"corporate-approved"-position, and they fared poorly as a result. Jo
Swinson, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, presented herself exactly as
such, and suffered the ignominy of losing her seat to a 27-year-old rookie
challenger from the Scottish National Party.
Nevertheless, there are certainly lessons that American progressives could
learn from Labour's loss:
1. Get ready for a coordinated media smear campaign.
British media managed to turn Corbyn, an elderly, vegetarian, anti-war
pacifist, into a figure of hate, presenting him as a terrorist sympathizer,
a Communist spy and a national security threat. One academic study of media
coverage included an entire section entitled "Delegitimization through
Ridicule, Scorn and Personal Attacks," finding that 75% of articles
misrepresented Corbyn or his views. And a report from Loughborough
University found a relentless and overwhelming anti-Labour and
pro-Conservative message across the British media in the election run up.
Progressives who intend to challenge power can expect similar coordinated
attacks from power's mouthpieces.
2. The antisemitism smears are coming.
Media managed to convince much of the British public that the lifelong
anti-racism activist is a secret Jew-hater. British historian Mark Curtis
noted there had been 1,450 articles in national newspapers linking Corbyn to
antisemitism in the past three months alone. The reason for the allegations,
as the Washington Post noted in a since-deleted tweet, was "because of [his]
strong statements on Palestinian rights."
The barrage succeeded. When media researchers asked the public what
percentage of Labour members faced official complaints over antisemitism,
the average guess was 34%. The actual answer is 0.1%. When questioned why
they were off by such a massive factor, respondents replied that they chose
a number that seemed commensurate with the media coverage.
This tactic will be far more difficult to stick on somebody like Sanders who
speaks with such a stereotypical New York Jewish accent. Yet media, seeing
how effective it was in discrediting a progressive in the UK, have already
begun attempting to smear those around him (e.g., Spectator, 12/5/19;
Commentary, 12/13/19).
Of particular note is a Washington Examiner article (12/13/19) claiming
Sanders' campaign is "the most antisemitic in decades." Its author, Tiana
Lowe, calls infamous fascist troll Milo Yiannopoulos "awesome" and regularly
boasts of her pride in her Nazi collaborator grandfather, whose organization
participated in the Holocaust that killed Sanders' close relatives.
Nevertheless, the attacks, if not the substance of the allegations, must be
taken seriously.
3. Solidarity with developing countries will not be tolerated.
Corbyn, like Sanders, immediately condemned the US-backed coup against Evo
Morales in Bolivia, an action that drew the ire of an outraged pro-coup
media (London Independent, 11/11/19; Daily Express, 11/11/19), who accused
him of putting "Marxist solidarity ahead of democracy" (London Times,
11/12/19). Both men have been denounced for their connections, imaginary or
otherwise, to Venezuela (FAIR.org, 3/5/19). Sanders' history of solidarity
with Nicaragua in the 1980s will be presented as support for a dictatorship.
The left will have to have a response.
4. Building a movement to reach elderly voters will be crucial.
The Labour movement has managed to build an impressive network of
alternative and social media countering the corporate press, reaching
millions of young people, who voted 3 to 1 in favor of Corbyn. However,
there was little concerted effort to reach elderly voters, who still largely
rely on traditional media for news, information and opinion. This
contributed to only 18% of those over 65 voting Labour, and the retired vote
proved to be the backbone of the Tory victory. A similar phenomenon is
happening in the US, where Sanders is the runaway favorite among the
under-50s, but polls at just 5% among elderly voters, despite his commitment
to the kind of social safety net programs they depend upon. Connecting with
Boomers and Generation X, who use the Internet and social media for news far
less than younger Americans, will require a specially geared effort.
5. Don't unquestioningly accept advice from centrists.
Under enormous pressure from the "centrist" wing of his party and the media,
Corbyn took a "on the one hand/on the other hand" approach to Brexit, the
dominant issue of the campaign. Rather than arguing that leaving the
European Union was a necessary response to undemocratic, austerity-loving
Eurocrats-or, contrariwise, that Brexit must be opposed as a xenophobic
scapegoating of immigrants, the British equivalent of "build the
wall"-Labour was induced to split the difference, promising to renegotiate a
break with the EU and then asking voters once again whether they wanted to
leave or not, while Corbyn professed neutrality on the question. Following
the media's insistent advice that the safe path is always somewhere in the
middle, the position called to mind the line attributed to Groucho Marx:
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them. well, I have others."
Virtually every seat Labour lost was a "Leave" constituency, suggesting that
Corbyn was hurt by Labour's attempts to "moderate." Turnout also declined
from 2017 to 2019, and there are indications that the decline was greater in
constituencies with more young voters-by far the most pro-Labour demographic
group. All of the centrist defectors from the Conservatives and Labour lost
their seats, as did the pro-EU, stop-Brexit-at-any-cost Liberal Democrat
leader Jo Swinson-illustrating that the media center and the public center
are not always the same.
Alan MacLeod /
Alan MacLeod /
