“政治上的正确性”要求记者和学者推崇世界主义和人权高于主权，即要求他们放弃基于民族、国家的意识形态，而服从于美国国家安全和跨国公司利益的世界主义意识形态。由于世界主义占据着道德制高点，在这种“政治上的正确性”的压力下，特别是西方传媒和学术机构凭借其雄厚的财力和先进的技术，再加上冷战后人们对西方学术界和思想库的顶礼膜拜，已经意识不到一种全球化大一统的思想控制。
“政治上的正确性”是由美国体制内精英分子确定的。这些精英是全球化政治议程设置者和社会价值的解释者。他们制定了一整套全球化时代的社会与知识的行为准则。媒体不宽容任何政治上不正确的政见，更不允许体制外的人，如乔姆斯基之类的体制外学者进入他们的主流话语体系。包括乔姆斯基在内的一些有独立思想的学者都认为，美国媒体的这种趋势导致了意识形态多元化的消亡，对新闻操纵、曲解和传播工具的控制的危险性增大。
在意识形态全球化时代，主流媒体界和学术界中胸怀坦荡、敢用事实说话的人越来越少，为了保持在体制内（Establishment）精英集团中的位置，他们必须坚持“政治上的正确性”原则。更何况，在著名大学里当教授的年收入在10万到20万美元之间，有受人尊重的社会特殊地位，写的文章和评论能够在主流媒介上发表，并能得到利益集团的课题资助，何乐而不为呢？
通过“政治上的正确性”来控制人民是一种令人恐惧的现象。乔姆斯基在《制造同意》这本书中写道：“这并不像人们天真想象的那样，好像思想灌输与民主制度是不合拍的。正相反，正像许多思想家观察到的：思想灌输是民主制度的精髓。在一个军事国家里或是一个封建国家里，或者在我们今天称之为极权国家里，人民想什么无所谓，因为你手中有一根大棒子挥舞在人民的头上，你可以用大棒子控制人民。但是，当国家失去了大棒子，当你无法用武力控制人民，当人民的声音可以听到时，你就会面临这个问题。人民会变得那么好奇，那么傲慢，以致他们不愿屈尊于一个文明的统治。因此，你必须控制人民的思想。最通常的办法就是宣传。通过制造同意，创造幻想，使公众对一些事情感兴趣，而对另一些事情表示冷漠。”而“妖魔化中国”可以唤起受众的兴趣，否则就会引起受众的冷淡。
选择性与选票之需求
在美国的各种选举活动中，有野心的政客们和想出名的各类活动家们更是需要搭乘“中国妖魔”故事的大船进入报章杂志的大标题，并企图通过以天使的形象咒骂可恶的“撒旦”来赢得公众的钦佩和选票。
美国的政治家们都非常清楚，在政治竞选中，要让自己的名字频频在传媒上亮相，那是要花很多钱的。但有一个既省钱又便捷的方法，那就是让自己的名字出现在一条公众愿意看的新闻中。因此，当《纽约时报》首先报道“中国间谍案”后，几乎所有想竞选下一届美国总统的候选人都纷纷对新闻界慷慨陈词，用最具煽情的形容词来谴责中国。媒体变成了那些整天想出风头的政客们的传声筒和扩音器，损害了媒体提供客观、准确和公正报道的公信力。
。
"The political correctness" by the United States within the system identified by the elite. These elite globalization set the political agenda and to explain the value of the community. They developed a set of the era of globalization and knowledge of the code of conduct. Media do not tolerate any politically incorrect views, but also does not allow the people outside the system, such as Chomsky like structure of the scholars into their mainstream discourse system. Chomsky, including some of the scholars who have independent thinking that the United States media this trend led to the demise of the ideological pluralism of news manipulation, distortion tool for the control and dissemination of the dangers of the increase.
In the ideological era of globalization, the mainstream media and academia in mind forthright, dares to speak with the fact there are less, in order to keep within the system (Establishment) in the location of the elite group, they must adhere to the "political correctness of the "principle. Moreover, in the famous university, a professor of income in the 100,000 to 200,000 US dollars between a respected community special status, writing articles and comments can be made in the mainstream media, and interest groups will be the subject of funding , Why not go ahead?
Through "political correctness of the" to control people is a frightening phenomenon. Chomsky in "manufacturing consent" this book wrote: "This is not so naive as to imagine the people, like the democratic system and ideological indoctrination is not the harmony. Contrary, as many thinkers observed: ideological indoctrination is the essence of a democratic system. country in a military or a feudal country, or we call it a totalitarian state, does not matter what people think, because you have a big stick hands waving in people's heads, you can control people with big stick, but when the country lost a big stick, when you can not control people by force, when the people's voices can be heard, you will be faced with this problem. people will become so curious, so arrogant, so They do not want to condescended to in a civilized rule. Therefore, you must control people's minds. most common method is publicity. agreed by manufacturing, creating illusions, so that the public interest in a number of things, and some other things that indifference. " "demonizing China" can arouse the audience's interest, otherwise this will cause the audience's indifference.
Selective demand with votes
In the United States the various election activities, ambitious politicians and well-known to the various activists need to take more "China demons," the story of a big ship to enter the headlines in newspapers and magazines, and through attempts to curse the image of an angel abhorrent "Satan" to win the public's admiration and votes.
American politicians have been very clear in the political campaign, to let their names appear on frequently in the media, it is to spend a lot of money. Not only save money but also a convenient way, it is to let his name appear in a public willing to look at the news. Therefore, when the "New York Times" first report "China Spy Case", almost all want to run the next President of the United States that all candidates have generous remarks to the media, the adjective used most sensational to condemn China. The media has become a day to those politicians who airs the microphones and loudspeakers, damage of the media to provide objective, accurate and impartial report's credibility.
