What is the function of the media in a democratic society? The standard view is that the public should have easy access to information, ideas and opinions. This sort of free expression is necessary so that the public can have some sort of meaningful control over the political process, as several Supreme Court justices have argued.

This standard view is expressed in college courses and through the media themselves. It’s worth mentioning, however, that there is a contrary view. Drawing on the research of MIT Professor Noam Chomsky, we see that this contrary view goes back to the English revolution in the 17th century. During this time, a radical democratic movement developed that was considered outrageous by respectable people. These radical Democrats were putting out pamphlets questioning authority and its mysteries.

They had “cast all the mysteries and secrets of government … before the vulgar (like pearls before swine),” and had “made the people thereby so curious and so arrogant that they will never find humility enough to submit to a civil rule,” as historian Clement Walker put it.

Turning to the United States in the 20th century, Walter Lippman wrote, “The public must be put in its place,” so that we may “live free of the trampling and the roar of a bewildered herd,” whose “function” is to be “interested spectators of action,” not participants.

Lippman perceived a “revolution” in “the practice of democracy,” as “the manufacture of consent” has become “a self-conscious art and a regular form of popular government.

“In the absence of institutions and education by which the environment is so successfully reported that the realities of public life stand out very sharply against self-centered opinion, the common interests very largely elude public opinion entirely, and can only be managed by a specialized class whose personal interests reach beyond the locality,” and are able to perceive “the realities.”

Edward Bernays wrote that “the very essence of the democratic process is the freedom to persuade and suggest,” wa view he called “the engineering of consent.” A 1928 public relations manual written by Bernays read: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in a democratic society. It is the intelligent minorities which (sic) need to make use of propaganda continuously and systematically.”

The influential moralist and foreign affairs advisor Reinhold Niebuhr (who heavily influenced Kennedy intellectuals and statesman George Kennan, among others) wrote that “rationality belongs to the cool observers,” while the common person follows not reason, but faith. The cool observer, he explained, must recognize “the stupidity of the average man,” and must provide “emotionally potent oversimplifications” that will keep these naive simpletons on course.

From these perspectives, indoctrination is the essence of “democracy” — which mandarin academics and American elites essentially define as the unhampered rule of the privileged elites themselves.

This form of “democracy” has been remarkably successful. Problems arose in the 1960s when large segments of the public became politically active. The Trilateral Commission brought together elites from Europe, Japan and the United States, and warned of this “crisis of democracy” as some of the despised common people wanted to enter the political arena. This “excess of democracy” required more “moderation in democracy,” the Commission concluded, seeking to return to the days when “Truman had been able to govern the country with the cooperation of a relatively small number of Wall Street lawyers and bankers.”

Quite a lot of what the corporate owned media distribute would, in more honest days, be rightfully called propaganda. When you take a close look at how the public relations and advertising industries work, you realize there is a tremendous effort being put forth to manage and manipulate opinion in the interests of those who own and control so much.

The road to TRUE democracy and freedom, rather than the illusions to which we’re subjected, requires an informed, enlightened citizenry. At this point, I would admit that much of the public is misinformed and/or apathetic about politics. This may be partially their fault, but much of this is a result of the culture — much of which is consciously propagated, incited and controlled by politico-economic elites. As John Milton wrote in 1642, “They who have put out the people’s eyes reproach them of their blindness.”

I’ll close with a few words from Chomsky: “The question is whether privileged elites should dominate mass communication and should use this power as they tell us they must — namely to impose necessary illusions to manipulate and deceive the stupid majority and remove them from the public arena. The question in brief is whether democracy and freedom are values to be upheld or threats to be avoided. In this possibly terminal phase of human existence, democracy and freedom are more than values to be treasured, they may be essential to survival.”

Drew Chebuhar is a senior in journalism and mass communication from Muscatine.