How the Media got "Class" Wrong in the Democratic Primaries

[IndianaGreen]

How the Media got "Class" Wrong in the Democratic Primaries

By Mike Tolochko

The struggle for the votes from the working class has never been more openly discussed. In the mainstream media, we've heard the phrase “working class” far more than the classless phrase “middle class” in recent weeks. This is new feature for national elections.

Defining "working class" is a problem, however. Commercial pundits on CNN, MSNBC and other major corporate media are making the definition but in a way that shows their clearly anti-working class agenda. They have dissected the working class into its various parts. Why not? They have no interest in unifying workers with a peoples’ agenda.

In its rawest form the parceling process, as expressed on television went something like this:

“White working class voters” were crudely characterized as the "lunch bucket" crowd, and they, we were told, supported Hillary Clinton. After her primary wins in West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania, the pundits focused on that voting cluster as explaining the results. “White working class males" were similarly lumped into Hillary Clinton's column.

“Women” were for Clinton. The term was used sometimes to describe working-class woman, but neither their class relationships nor their ethnic backgrounds were ever mentioned. They were portrayed strictly as a gender vote. A significant percent of these voters either belong to labor unions or would if it were possible.

Overall, the not so indirect connotation about many of these voters was that they were motivated by race or racism in their choice of whom to support.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/7017/