March 11, 2012

The Supreme Court decided that the ads for Citizens United’s propaganda film about Hillary Clinton were constitutionally protected political speech. If a non-527 organization such as Michael Moore had done this as he did in 2004, it wouldn’t have mattered. Media outlets can be purchased by anyone. Let’s say the Washington Post, CNN, or Michael Moore supported Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton in 2008. Does any law limit the amount of money they spend supporting Barack Obama in their newspaper, TV station, website, or movie studio? There are no such laws; the First Amendment explicitly protects journalism and media advocacy. Media outlets can blather and editorialize all they like, whenever they like. They aren’t even required to make a profit: Many of them do not and are subsidized by wealthy patrons who presumably throw their money at such ventures to influence elections. McCain-Feingold explicitly allowed for such “media outlets” to editorialize all they like. The Supreme Court decision gives some of this vast power to 527 corporations, other corporations, and unions. The result is you don’t have to own The New York Times to influence an election; you can contribute to a corporation or a union which will buy an ad for you.

Imagine for a moment what the world would be like if the Supreme Court voted the other way. As far as I can tell, the result would be a slight increase in the mass media’s power and a slight decrease in that of political activists, unions, and corporations. Nothing else would change appreciably. Vast sums would still be spent on political campaigns. Lobbyists and unsavory political-pressure groups would still have tremendous influence on the laws passed. Corporations, media elites, and foreign agents would still have preposterous amounts of control over American policy. Thoughtful critics of the Citizens United decision agree.

Unfortunately, most in the media (the party who lost this decision, ultimately) have distorted the problem down to a mindless soundbite: “Are corporations people?” I don’t think corporations are actual or legal people, nor does anyone else with a lick of sense. If corporations were people, Google and Microsoft owe a lot of back taxes, and they need to build a prison big enough to house MF Global. If there was ever a corporation which represented people, Citizens United would certainly qualify, as would the Service Employees Union. I think the SEU and Citizens United represent people better than CNN or The Wall Street Journal do. I also think groups such as the SEU and Citizens United have considerably less power than mass-media outlets, even after the Supreme Court decision.

This decision should cause thoughtful citizens to pause and think about how modern political sausage gets made. It should get people scratching their heads about the byzantine legal regulations involved in an election, as well as the wretched and disgusting ways in which powerful interests and political activists manipulate them. It should inspire folks to think about the centers of power in our society and how the media has deceived us about its own power and interests in this issue. Instead, we are distracted with red-herring phrases about whether or not Google is someone I can punch in the throat.

 


Columnists

Sign Up to Receive Our Latest Updates!