Not on this scale. In 1930 only about 2-5% of the population had a radio. And smaller newspapers weren't exactly this evil.
It's not just the fake news, it's the entire zombification of the population that are glued to the screen.
I still read my local newspaper, and even though I see some biases from time to time, it's nothing like the TV.
Information prior to TV/Radio was pretty much a giant telephone game. By the time news reached the next city it would probably be so altered as to be completely different.
Imagine something like the conflict in Syria, and no one outside of southern Turkey or Northern Iraq knew anything was even happening! The government and competing powers there could do even worse than they are, with no one even knowing about it let alone caring or arguing against it.
It's a bit of a double edged sword, but frankly conservatives/libertarians/anarchists seem to think there's far more "control" over it than there is. There are multiple news stations, hundreds if you include local news stations, each presenting their own take on various issues.
Plus, if you're really looking for something great at spreading propaganda you should check out this new fangled "internet" thing. Anyone can post anything, and that "anyone" could be the exact same people you think are controlling the media... except with less oversight, and more anonymity.
You are mistaken, many always overweights the few. The mere fact that you can push through information that would be automatically censored or ignored in a mainline TV station is already overweighting all potential drawbacks.
Like the Snowden leaks, that would have never been reported on the TV stations.
It sound almost as if you don't like the fact that the internet can contain tons of different opinions and useful educational material.
Just look at the government manuals, they are outdated by 20 years, the latest information is always available on the internet.
The latest disinformation and misinformation is also available on the internet. You can literally find "evidence" for any view you care to put forth if you search hard enough.
For example this guy created a fake news website complete with disclaimers at the bottom stating it wasn't real, and still plenty of people believed it.
I'm not saying the internet is a bad thing, any more than TV is a bad thing. They are both just mediums... and stupidity can flow through any medium.
I understand what you are saying. But the disinformation on the internet literally can't be worse than on the TV.
Simply because you can add your own view of the things without facing censorship (at least on places like Steemit and free blogs, not like Facebook where they censor everything).
So if the amount of disinformation on TV is X, then the amount of disinformation on the internet is Y, where Y<X because the truth will not be censored.
It's one thing to bury the truth under a mountain of disinformation, and it's another thing to not let it being published at all.