zlacker

A quick reminder of how democracy works:

people's choice -> government -> media -> narrative -> people's choice

>>throw3+(OP)
> people's choice -> government -> media -> narrative -> people's choice

In this toy model, Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch have zero influence over either the media or government?

>>throw3+(OP)
I disagree with the assertion that the relation is cyclical. In reality, all of these systems are highly interdependent. I'd model it as a weighted complete digraph.

And certain subsets of these various nodes have a greater outsized influence than their peers. For example, the intelligentsia within the people are usually far more impactful than say Joe Blow from Appalachia.

>>Infini+c8
I’d say mass media, especially in entertainment and news (but I repeat myself), is far more influential than intellectuals, except inasmuch as they are influenced by them. But let’s be real, Noam Chomsky doesn’t have a ton of clout in Hollywood. If anything, it’s more about money than about the intelligentsia. And if you’re talking about social-media influencers, please revisit my first point.

>>JumpCr+97
No, of course you're right, the "toy model" is exaggerated. I think it was more true in some countries than others and several decades ago, when there was no internet and the media were dominated by a few players (including the government itself, in many countries) all very much established.

Let's say that I suspect that democracy is a system that assumes public opinion to be directed so that it doesn't stray too much from a narrow range of possibilities. This can be done just by manipulating the Overton window.