http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/28/politics/iowa-caucuses-media/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

The secret that nobody wanted you to know (except for CNN): the Iowa caucuses don't actually matter. The media only tries to *make them matter* because doing so gives them power!

Thanks for enlightening us, CNN, but hey... There's sort of an elephant in the room... Aren't *you* the media?

So why is CNN exposing other media networks if it also means exposing themselves?

Well, first of all, notice that CNN tries to casually dance around the fact that they are a part of this deception machine. So they aren't taking their share of the guilt. But they aren't saying "Fox is..." or "NBC is.." because this isn't about guilt.

It's about power. As CNN (correctly) pointed out, this whole system is about power. If excessive media attention for an otherwise worthless caucus means that caucus gains some influence, that influence is coming directly from the media.

But why exactly is CNN doing this now? I can think of two possible explanations:

1. CNN doesn't think they have much power in this particular primary. Perhaps other news stations (i.e. Fox) have relatively more power this time around.

2. CNN doesn't have a vested interest in whatever this power could get them in this particular primary. It may be the case that they saw something to gain by using this power in past elections, but something has changed this time around.

This primary is completely focused on the Republicans, because the Democrats are already pretty sure of their nominee...

So perhaps this article is indication that CNN is admitting to the role of 'liberal media' that Fox likes to dish out. If they are actually liberal media, they would have less of a vested interest in this particular primary. Fox, whether an ultra-conservative monolith or 'fair and balanced', would have something to gain.

Another thing to notice is that whether CNN assumes the title or not, Fox has established the association of 'liberal media' and CNN (or pretty much any other non-Fox news network). This association is salient at least for Fox's primary demographic- conservatives.

This means that, objectively, they have more relative influence in this primary than CNN does. Because the viewers that are voting are much more likely to be Fox viewers than CNN viewers.

So perhaps CNN identifies that Fox has relatively more influence in this presidential primary than they do, and this particular CNN article is an attempt to strip away some of the relative influence that Fox is enjoying. In other words, maybe this article about 'media games' is just a media game.