History is being written. The narrative evolving in the mainstream media about the 2016 election is that Hillary Clinton lost as a result of Russian hacking.
It has yet to be disclosed how Russian hacking caused the election loss.
I think the soon-to-be-hegemonic explanatory framework is going to articulate a "dumbed-down" American public, represented as too befuddled to discern truth from the "fake news" about Hillary Clinton promulgated across the Internet.
What will be missing from this emerging narrative's explanatory framework?
Declining economic opportunities wrought by Clinton neoliberal reforms (e.g., free trade and financial de-regulation) and dis-satisfaction with DNC treatment of Bernie Sanders will fade in significance as the alleged role of Russian hacking ascends.
I fear this narrative is going to be used to censor "alternative" news sites in a new regime of truth deployed to combat the productivity of the web 2.0 environment.
It is true the web 2.0 is a chaotic place where conspiracy theories do run amok. However, the mainstream news also deploys the worst forms of sophistry on occasion and its regular formatting mandates too often lead to truncated, homogenized, and stereotyped narratives of events.
Rather than elevating one group's truths over another should we not focus instead on sharpening the critical thinking skills of the electorate?