If you want to understand how the media establishment views the electorate, you do not need to read their dense political analyses or sit through their hours of panel discussions. You only need to look at their headlines. A single sentence is often enough to reveal the deep-seated paternalism that characterizes modern journalism.
Take, for example, a recent headline prominently displayed on the homepage of SIC Notícias, one of Portugal’s primary news outlets, reporting on the ongoing municipal elections in France: "Extreme right and radical left destabilize municipal elections in France."
In those nine words, the establishment’s mask slips entirely. It is a masterclass in narrative framing, exposing a fundamental disdain for the democratic process when it fails to yield the "correct" results. According to this framing, when the citizens of one of the world’s oldest and most foundational democracies go to the ballot box and vote for candidates outside the traditional center, they are not participating in democracy—they are "destabilizing" it.
This headline perfectly encapsulates a growing and dangerous trend in how our media and political elites operate: they are no longer merely reporting the news; they are telling us what to think about it. And what they want us to think is that any deviation from the centrist status quo is inherently illegitimate.
The Weaponization of Labels
When millions of French citizens cast their votes for non-establishment candidates, it is an exercise of their fundamental democratic right. It is not an anomaly, a glitch, or a hostile takeover—it is the voice of the people. Yet, the media establishment rushes to invalidate this voice by plastering it with warning labels.
Words like "extreme," "radical," and "populist" have been stripped of their objective political definitions and weaponized. They are no longer descriptive terms; they are excommunications. When the media slaps these labels onto political movements, the underlying message to the public is clear: These opinions are illegitimate. These voters are dangerous. Do not listen to them.
But why are the French voting this way? It is not because they have suddenly been hypnotized by radical ideologies. They are voting this way because they are living in a reality that the elites in Paris—and the commentators in Lisbon—refuse to acknowledge.
A Disconnected Elite and a Fractured Nation
The establishment media acts baffled by the rise of alternative political forces, completely ignoring the fertile ground of discontent that the "moderate" governments have sowed over the last few decades.
The French people are currently led by a president who, on the global stage, often appears more like an international court jester than a statesman representing the legacy of De Gaulle. Under the stewardship of these so-called sensible moderates, the nation has fractured. Citizens are watching as entire cities and neighborhoods are transformed by mass immigration, leading to a profound sense of cultural erasure and alienation in their own homeland.
Coupled with this cultural anxiety is a devastating socioeconomic reality. The gap between the urban elites and the working-class provinces has widened into a chasm. The people who actually build, feed, and power the country are increasingly left behind, struggling with the cost of living while being lectured from above about their "backward" views.
When the electorate looks at the establishment, they do not see stability; they see the architects of their decline. Choosing to vote against these architects is not "destabilization." It is an act of political survival.
The Football Match of "Moderate" Politics
To prevent the masses from seeking real alternatives, the elites have long sold us the illusion of choice through the "moderate" left and the "moderate" right. We are told that these are the only two respectable pillars of a functioning society.
In reality, these establishment parties are little more than rival football teams. They wear different colors, they chant different slogans, and they boast incredibly loyal fan bases who will defend them unconditionally, year after year. Every election cycle, we are treated to a fierce, theatrical derby. Sometimes the red team wins; sometimes the blue team wins.
But when the match is over and the winner takes office, the actual policies—the globalist economic trajectory, the cultural permissiveness, the steady centralization of power—remain virtually identical. They are playing the exact same game, bound by the exact same unspoken rules.
The tragic difference is that politics is not a sport. In football, a bad match just ruins your weekend. In this political theater, the spectacle is ugly, the stakes are existential, and no matter which "moderate" team lifts the trophy, the citizens always end up losing.
A Crisis of the Establishment, Not of Democracy
The panic evident in headlines like the one from SIC Notícias is not born out of a genuine fear for democracy. It is born out of a fear of irrelevance. The establishment is realizing that their labels are losing their power. Calling a movement "extreme" no longer works when the "moderate" center has made daily life intolerable for the average citizen.
When the media complains about destabilization, what they are actually mourning is the loss of their own control over the narrative. They are frustrated that the French voters are refusing to play their assigned roles in the establishment’s script.
Portugal’s media would do well to reflect on this. Instead of acting as the ideological gatekeepers of what constitutes acceptable thought, journalists should perhaps ask why the people are turning away from the center. Until they do, they will continue to look at a functioning democracy and mistake it for a crisis.
The people are speaking. It is not their fault if the establishment simply hates what they have to say.
