Haim Saban, co-owner and chairman of Univision, has just purchased a 40% controlling interest in the Onion, a popular but ailing parody site/”newspaper.” Saban’s acquisition was unexpected, but made perfect sense: He and the Onion have a mutual history of supporting Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The Onion, like many influential media outlets, has not been shy about their loyalty to Clinton; fluff pieces aimed at generating sympathy for the flagging candidate litter their archives. For example, I’m Weighing Whether Or Not I Want To Go Through The Hell Of Appealing To You Idiotic, Uninformed Oafs and Hillary Clinton Tries To Woo Voters By Rescinding Candidacy show that this is not a new trend, and that their once-proud publication had sold out long before Saban slid an offer across their desk. The first article was published during her candidacy for the 2008 election, published in March of 2007, and the second corresponds with the current race, having been posted as recently as April. However, even though the Onion may have been loyal to Clinton, they always made sure to ridicule her just as much as they criticized her; Until now.
Saban, himself, is Clinton’s top donor, having contributed over $2,040,000 to her campaigns, and upwards of $10,000,000 to the Clinton Foundation. As any thinking voter may clearly perceive, his purchase of the Onion is not a happy coincidence. Money and influence go hand-in-hand, and are directly proportional to each other. This fact is not lost on heavy donors such as Mr. Saban, whose livelihoods depend on a strong talent for persuasion.
Just a fews weeks after Mr. Saban Purhased a 40% interest in the Onion, they publish an article, Female Presidential Candidate Who Was United States Senator, Secretary Of State Told To Be More Inspiring a sad and pathetic attempt to promote Hillary Clinton. While there is nothing illegal about donating to a favored candidate, there is a feeling of unease which accompanies the idea of media moguls spending millions on politicians; the news they produce suddenly becomes nothing more than favorable propaganda for their interests, which are personified in the candidates they promote. This, in turn, misleads voters to believe that special interests disguised as humor or news is factual. The danger in this is rather simple to understand.
A handful of elite individuals, including Mr. Saban, have personal stake in these elections, which they believe supersede the voices of millions of Americans currently being suffocated under mountains of SuperPAC donations. By playing puppeteer with elected officials and media Americans have come to trust, Saban and those like him effectively prove their intentions are selfish, at least, and malignant, at worst. Whatever the circumstance, it shows an open disregard for the will of the voters to think for themselves – and, as history has proven, such single-minded manipulation can result in devastating consequences. When the American people no longer trust the leaders they’ve chosen, and it seems that every possible alternative already rests in someone’s pocket, it’s the beginning of acute civil unrest, with very real, very serious long-term ramifications.
The rise of Adolph Hitler, aided by the populist indoctrination of Joseph Goebbels, is a familiar story, but one need not hearken back any further than 2008 for a more recent example of the consequences. President Barack Obama, with the full backing of the U.S. mainstream media (with notable exceptions such as FOX News, et al), skyrocketed to the Democratic nomination. What we have been left with, eight years later, is simply an inflamed, infected version of what we started out with: Racial tension, unpopular wars, and a doubling-down of U.S. national debt to the tune of nearly $12 trillion. Had he not had donors such as Clinton has Haim Saban, or friendly media sources owned by said donors, there’s a good possibility most of the nation outside of Illinois wouldn’t recognize his name. But since he did have those things, we were left with another politician working directly against American citizens, just to make good on promises to his wealthy friends.
In the 2008 election, Hillary Clinton was such a popular choice for the Democratic nomination, she was invited to serve as Secretary of State under President Obama. With a top Cabinet position on her resume, it’s only natural her value to Mr. Saban has multiplied exponentially – which, in turn, explains the elevated measures he has opted for to see her clinch the nomination. The Onion’s main demographics are males and females, ages 18-34, mainly college and graduate school students. According to a survey by the Roper Center at Cornell, this same collective is culpable for a staggering Obama victory over U.S. Senator John McCain in the 2008 election, at a margin of 53-45% of total votes.
Haim Saban has apparently put all these pieces together, and made a corresponding effort to influence the 2016 Presidential election in purchasing the Onion. As owner of Univision, Mr. Saban recognizes the potential of news and entertainment media to bend the public to a particular whim. However, even after Clinton’s scandal-ridden tenure as Secretary of State, Saban continues to use his sway in order to back her. The most rational conclusion to draw from this, is that he doesn’t necessarily care about her qualifications for the job, so much as how he can use her from such a position to his own personal ends. With the complicity of the Onion in such dubious tactics, they yield whatever credibility they had before, even as a parody publication. Whether their rationale be financial or political, those who work for the Onion are now working as shills for Saban and Univision. Their integrity has effectively been traded for partisan whoredom, all towards an ultimate goal which includes only Clinton and Saban, while they and the American public they’ve betrayed are left to face the music.