When it comes to popular opinion on politics in the United States, partisanship between our two major parties has created a rift when it comes to media coverage. With this polarization of consumers, networks are influenced by both the companies that own them, and the fight to keep viewership high. The result is that mainstream media holds significant sway over the public’s consumption of information regarding politicians and those around them, but it will almost always be met by a conflicting vision from the other side.

In this way, Hillary Clinton, a Democrat who has been a target of media review for many years now, has a pretty tight control over her image with about half the country, and fairly little control over the rest. It wasn’t always like this though, as before Hillary was such a powerful figure in the U.S. Government, her image was determined (in the media) by her relation to others, such as her marriage to Bill Clinton. While she was a successful lawyer in her own right, she didn’t have anywhere near the personal influence she does today, or the backers to help her create a media image, and therefore was subjected to whatever spin they wished to put on the story of the day.

Now however, as Hillary runs for president, her media control is very noticeable. While some things have stuck from when she first started being covered, such as being called “Hillary” or “HRC” among other things, her campaign media managers actively work to develop her image, be it on social media, what she wears, or even what interviewers are allowed to ask her many news stations. One of her top donors, Time Warner Cable, who has donated over $400,000 to her campaign, owns CNN. With her new large support network and backing of the DNC, it is easy to see the micromanaging of her image that occurs.

For example, in CNN politics a poll was issued after a debate asking about the victor, and online respondents answered that Sanders had won 81% to Hillary’s 13%. This was quickly removed and replaced with an opinion piece titled “Clinton triumphs in Democrat debate as rivals compete to lose.” showing a clear spin from what could be considered the “public’s opinion” (although online polls are subject to brigading, especially from the younger voting group that supports Bernie).

Jumping over to Fox News, we see the opposite side of this. Regardless of what Hillary does, it will only bring up the negative, as we see from its coverage of her in almost exclusively speculation about her e-mail scandal. While Hillary can control her own image in public, and a portion of the media’s coverage of her in a positive way, at this point in time a person’s public image is created by such a large variety of sources that there is no hope for influencing them all.

Overall, I believe Hillary has a much higher amount of agency in the creation of her own public image than almost any other person in America, but with this visibility and power comes the detractors who will always exist on the opposite side of any vision she tries to create.