@keobooks I would agree, the FDR years were a loud liberal progressive voice. Two of the big differences between that era and now are mass media regulation and ownership. In the thirties, forties, etc., there were limits, both technological and regulatory, which limited the ability of one ideology to cram the limited print space or air time. The only way one could flood public mind would be through such printed media as leaflets, pamphlets, brochures, posters and the like. Radio and television stations were required to program a certain amount of the broadcast day as “public affairs” programming, which in many cases was news. The Fairness Doctrine was an FCC policy that would ensure that any viewpoint on a controversial topic could be countered on the same station.
Due to the increase of the number of media outlets (such as cable and teletext) the Fairness Doctrine was revoked by the FCC in 1987
The expansion of non-broadcast media (starting with cable TV and Teletext, and expanding into today’s world of digital engulfment) made it seem that there were so many more outlets available that it was no longer necessary to enforce fairness in broadcast communications media.
Also, in earlier years there were regulations on how many media outlets (TV, newspaper, radio) could be owned by one person or corporation in a given market. These regulations have also been dispensed with, allowing a consolidation of the media, the likes of which has never been seen. Clear Channel and Comcast are the poster children for this consolidation.