> I noticed almost all of the mainstream US media became an echo chamber for pro-Clinton content.

I like media in general and thinking how it is used to control and manipulate people. Especially the idea of the illusion of freedom. I've always recommended Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky.

That analyzes how corporatist media is used to manipulate and control public opinion, and I think at not time has it been truer than in the last election cycle. CNN's Cuomo "these documents are illegal to look at, let us interpret them for you" is such a wonderful example of it. I love it. (sorry everyone, I've mentioned that multiple times).

There is a new twist here and that is social media. I wonder what they'd have to say about that.

You're not wrong about the pro-Clinton content. I'm politically liberal, so I've kind of sheltered myself from the rightwing stuff. A couple of weeks ago, I started looking at it, after some conversations with some trump supporters. I was completely floored. I remember the situation in 2000, and 2004, and there was a lot of crazy stuff particularly from FoxNews, and commentators like Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, Dinesh Dsouza, and others. In 2008, even MORE wacky wacky whackjobs like Glenn Beck and Michael Wiener (Savage).

But now, there seems to be a whole slew: hundreds of these weird little websites out there, generating crazy crazy fake news, sharing them around, and disseminating them, for the purpose of gaining ad-revenue from gullible conservatives. The side effect is something like a palm-oil land-clearing project, where a whole forest gets burned down, and everyone downwind is choking on the smoke and ash.

I think this is because of the corrosive effect of money in politics. So many billions of dollars going into political ads. So many very conservative elites, investing in major media channels and directing editorial content. Causing a major collapse in credibility of ALL major news networks, which creates an ecosystem for these little sites to pop up.

The problem is all the seriously delusional people who believe these stories about muslims marching to YOUR neighborhood to demand sharia law, and Hillary Clinton being a secret KKK member.

Ironically, Glenn Beck is one of the more sensible voices on that end of politics this election cycle...

I guess Glenn must have stopped worrying about Obama's plans to spark a race war, overthrow the government and install a Communist Islamic Caliphate, then?

What defines a 'mainstream' media outlet anyways?

There were a handful of news outlets thoroughly reporting issues between DNC and Bernie Sanders such as Huffington Post and al-jazeera.

I suppose these are not 'mainstream'? Perhaps mainstream media is defined by having a dedicated TV channel, or at least primetime TV show? Isnt it almost customary for such outlets to prioritize ratings over comprehensive coverage?

Who knows the definition, but I can tell you who is included. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN.... Watching the anchors on these channels respond to Trumps performance on election night was jaw dropping. I was amazed that they weren't even going to try to pretend that they were impartially covering this election. I've always known the Fox and msnbc were a joke, but I have zero confidence in a single US based news outlet after this election.

BTW Huffington Post stands out as an exceptionally huge steaming pile of partisan garbage as well.

Both of those are left wing outlets.

I'd think "mainstream" would be the ones which still posit themselves as un-biased (CBS, NBC, ABC, NY Times, Wash Post, etc.).

I say the more the merrier. Let people decide.

For a different take on Sanders being "sabotaged": http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-el...

...big media outlets protecting the corrupt status quo.

They are doing their job.

How many of us buy paper newspaper? How many of us have paid news site account? or browse news site without ad blocker. We want to read content without ads so they are selling this content. Media is writing PR piece and getting paid.