I don't understand how people think that "controlling the narrative" is more overt now than in the past? In the past there wasn't even a Youtube, and if the loc

I don't understand how people think that "controlling the narrative" is more overt now than in the past? In the past there wasn't even a Youtube, and if the local news in whatever-town didn't want to carry your point of view, you weren't getting any ink. Argue all you want about if you approve of the policy, but let's stop acting like people not having unlimited access to megaphones is new or that we are in some sort of democratic crisis as a result. If you want access to someone's megaphone, you've always had to convince them to take you seriously. People perceived as arguing in bad faith can easily lose that - but even then, there is no lack of news networks or websites willing to give Rand Paul a platform still. (I'd personally go further and argue for MORE slowing down of idea transmission. Bring back MORE of a cooldown and consideration period before you just regurgitate the last thing you read on Twitter.)