There was one remarkable circumstance that caught everyone's eye when Trump won the 2016 presidential election: the new master of the White House absolutely ignored the mainstream press and communicated with the world via social media. His key hobby was Twitter. At the beginning of 2017, he had 24.7 million subscribers, and now there are 88.9 million of them. Trump's personal Twitter page has become a communicating means, which, as shown by the four years of his presidency, has competed favorably with the usual media opposing him, and still overlaps their influence. The reason is that the leading American media, which were desperately combating Trump by any means whatsoever, ran out of credit with both the American and foreign readers, and utterly ruined their own reputation as unbiased media outlets.

To experts who are professionally engaged in different countries' information and press, the credibility of America's leading media has been a myth for decades. Speaking about its own fairness of presentation, the American mainstream press presumes on the unsophistication and faith of the general reader alone. However, the recent US presidential election has shown that the bulk American audience is not all that simple-minded. Otherwise, given Trump's daily facing heavy-gun information bombardment from the CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Politico and others, nearly all the voters would have moved over to the democratic camp or, at least not voted for Trump, while remaining supportive of the Republicans. But even in such a situation, the popular votes, according to the same liberal press, have been almost equally divided. Meanwhile, the current President is speaking of massive voting and counting irregularities by the Democrats, probably not without reason.

The American liberal press has clearly ceased to reign over the minds of American people, to be a brainwashing tool. Being permanently attacked by the liberal media, Trump found an alternative way to reach out to the people, that is via Twitter and other social media. He used them to swiftly get his point across to public at large. But this short and often harsh form of broadcasting his opinion irritated Trump's opponents both at home and abroad. Not everyone was charmed by his willingness to aggressively "sting" his opponents via social media, much less to use them for conducting diplomacy. And Twitter wasn't long in showing its worth as an integral part of the US liberal establishment. Its owners constantly tried to put spokes in Trump's wheels.

In the midst of the current election campaign, Twitter began marking the President's messages as unreliable information. And this seems to have been the final and irrevocable downfall of the myth about America's "free press". If the leading social media outlet, which has made quite a name for itself and attracted millions of users across the globe over its declared FOI commitment, is engaged in this kind of "censorship", all the other traditional and online American media are not even in the equation. As a result, Trump has announced his intention to close down Twitter in the United States, referring to the "uncontrolled power" of social media. On May 28 this year, the President signed an Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship. It particularly reads that Facebook, Instagram and YouTube "wield immense, if not unprecedented, power to shape the interpretation of public events; to censor, delete, or disappear information; and to control what people see or do not see." Trump naturally implied himself in the first instance, as an object of social media outlets' nefarious activity. Anyway you look at it, he depicted the true face of the liberal media, which certainly embrace social networking sites by the nature of its function.

In early 2017 The National Interest magazine wrote: "Rhetoric is a small part of management. If management consisted of tweets alone, Bush and Obama would have resorted to this long ago." Time has shown that the "respected" magazine is wrong. First, Trump has been successfully competing with the mainstream press via Twitter. And second, Bush and Obama didn't use Twitter because they didn't have to. As part of the establishment, as "system" presidents, they held the entire press in their hands. And the "non-systemic" Trump got nothing but harsh criticism from the American media.

Come to think of the United States' analytical press including the above-mentioned National Interest and standing apart due to its pseudoscientific nature. This a quite commonly used integral part of the liberal establishment. The United States has a system for generating domestic and international public opinion consisting of a chain with at least two links: (1) think tanks and analytical journals – (2) newspapers, regular magazines, radio, TV, and online news outlets that can include all the previous ones, since all of them have their own websites. Initially, think tank "know-it-alls" invent forecasts for the future or provide insights into what has happened and publish this in "analytical" magazines. This attracts attention because of implying the engagement of science and scientists in forecasting and assessing. Afterwards, these "forecasts" and "assessments" get replicated by regular media, adjusting scientific ideas to the middle-brow level. And here we have a public opinion based on "scientific knowledge".

Meanwhile, if you refer to reports by a number of America's leading think tanks, say of late 2018, you may note that all of them presented a really dark perspective for the entire world having found itself on a verge of a global-scale war. American forecasts are about simulating a touchy (or any other) situation and egging the world on it. The US liberal establishment attempts to build a new "constructive model of global control" pursuing its own benefit. And how can it be created without destroying everything that exists today by provoking military, economic and moral chaos around the globe, to overcome which people will stop at nothing? That's just where US plans to show up as a savior with its new constructive model of global control.

In brief, all the American liberal press' "tricks" and hankey-pankey during the latest election campaign became as clear as daylight even to those who artlessly believed in the "credibility" of American press. The vast majority of Americans switched over to alternative, "non-system" information websites that balance themselves against the mainstream media. And these "non-system" information platforms are apparently gaining momentum while ensuring popular support with those who have experienced a comedown from the "unbiased" American press. The loss of this faith leads still further to the loss of faith among Americans in their own democracy and, subsequently, in their own country. Let's wait and see what comes of it...