We aren't powerless, unless we accept blindly what the media tells us.
In addition to the ever more mainstream practice of cord-cutting, more and more people are giving up on mainstream media in general. That isn't a trend that favors such a point--
I do however acknowledge some wisdom there; People DO seem to favor putting themselves into positions where they can claim victimhood, and thus absolve themselves of blame. The media makes a very good target for such blame. The presence of the media, and any messages it may be broadcasting, does not negate the obligation of the consuming public to independently verify the stories or messages being delivered to them.
That doesnt mean people dont like to pretend that "But I saw it on Fox News!" (or other news source) is a good justification for going off half cocked about something, and causing a shitstorm.
Whispers:
Many people are unwilling to accept that it is wrong to silence speech, regardless of what is being said. Many feel that it is OK to silence speech under certain circumstances, without realizing that the "certain circumstances" is very subjective indeed.
EG-- The christian fundie may feel it is perfectly justified to silence certain speech. (About things they might consider blasphemous, for instance-- or sexually immoral, like gay people trying to hook up.)
The SJW may mirror this kind of sentiment as well-- It is OK to silence certain speech (such as people using the N word, even if used in a non-racially motivated fashion [see definition 3 or 4... Depends on the dictionary-- Basically, a low class, undesirable person of any race.] or when used in a historical, or period fiction context (such as found in Tom Sawyer and pals.))
Both agree that it is OK to stifle certain speech. They just disagree with what speech should be stifled. Government, especially if it has its own agenda, takes the "Ok to stifle speech? OK! Got it!" approach, and runs with it, claiming it was upholding the wishes of the constituency.
It is never OK to stifle speech.