I’ve been watching C-Span in the mornings, a program called the Washington Journal, in which newspaper articles on a given topic are read, and later on guests come on to speak on a specific subject, and viewers are invited to call in and give opinions, comments and questions.

Though it’s far from perfect, I find it much less distressing than watching news commentary on commercial TV stations, for obvious reasons. I don’t think I need to mention the alarming lack of truth or even common sense on CNN and the other news and opinion channels. But while C-Span attempts to be balanced by alternately taking calls from Democrat, Republican and Independent (which includes all other than Democrat or Republican) callers, and by inviting guests whose own positions are deemed right-leaning or left-leaning, it’s striking how far from a balanced sampling of political opinion this is. It’s the same problem that plagues all mainstream media: there’s an absence of truth in the very premise. Republicans and Democrats hold positions that range from the far right to the moderate center, and the political left is essentially entirely absent, even on C-Span, save the very occasional actually-left-leaning caller.

The Political Compass website has created an enlightening graph that places those who ran for the US presidency in the spot on the spectrum that represents their political leanings, according to their positions and public statements. It’s interesting to note, and obvious enough, except that almost no one seems to be aware of it, that none of the presidential candidates fall to the left of center, except Kucinch and Nader. The site notes that Hillary Clinton would be considered a conservative in Europe. Yet the American public seems to accept the lie that she and Obama are left-leaning, and the media obviously encourages that belief. And actively suppresses any possibility of anyone saying otherwise on the airwaves.

Granted that an absence of leftist opinion is probably representative of the US public in general, but I have lately been more and more disturbed by the simple lack of acknowledged fact on what constitutes political thought across the spectrum. Leftist ideas are not merely suppressed by the media, they are made nonexistent. Moderate centrists are decried as raving liberals by right wing hate-mongers, and we are asked to accept this view as a legitimate opinion. Calling out those who support or enact harmful policies is treated as bad table manners, and meek centrists, when they’re invited to speak on television, barely even dare to state their bland positions for fear of seeming impolite.

This is nothing new of course, but it seems to be getting worse.

The internet was supposed to free us from the monolithic viewpoint of mainstream media, but it has utterly failed to accomplish that goal as far as I can tell, and it too seems to be getting worse. Widely-read political blogs have become cemented within a particular clique of followers, and each site attracts only those who already agree with the authors’ positions, except for trolls who stop by just to stir up trouble. The internet is so fragmented that there isn’t room for any particular viewpoint to take any kind of hold. For every blogger who talks sense, there are hundreds of loudmouths who perpetuate misinformation, and the result is a spectacle.