What the media means when they call someone a Divisive figure

When the media calls someone a "Divisive" figure,

What they really mean is,

This person has put forth ideas that dissent from the status quo pushed by the mainstream and their elite puppet masters. This has led to statistically significant numbers of people starting to think for themselves and question the status quo.

Before this person came along, there was much lesser dissent and so the population was unified in being indoctrinated by the mainstream media. Now, more and more people are waking up to this indoctrination and rebelling against it.

So there is a transition stage here : where significant portion of the population is still eating out of their hands, but more and more folks are now slipping out of their control. These dissenting parts of the population naturally aren't "unified" under their spell anymore.

And hence, the person is a "divisive" figure, in that he or she has managed to help several people break the mainstream's spell and start thinking for themselves.

So it's supposed to be a good thing. For us. But it's not good for the mainstream. Hence their negative spin on it.

Who are the "divisive" figures of our times? Let's see...

Alex Jones

Tommy Robinson

Katie Hopkins

Milo

Sargon of Akkad

Count Dankula

Jordan Peterson

Ben Shapiro

Dave Rubin

Candance Owens

Charlie Kirk

Sidney Watson

Paul Joseph Watson

Laura Loomer

Brittany Pettibone

Blonde in the Belly of the Beast

Ayaan Ali Hirsi

Imam Tawhidi

Maajid Nawaz

Yasmine Mohammad

Steven Crowder

Some Black Guy (he's a youtuber)

Brandon Tatum

Mike Adams

Liz Wheeler

Pewdiepie

Donald Trump

Bolsonaro

Matteo Salvini

Marie Le Pen

and many more. Many who may even have been silenced by the jealous mainstream long before they came to my attention. Heck, it's an emergent phenomena : you get rid of one, and soon enough there's more.

And over in India,

Arvind Kejriwal

< there may be more but I'm not in touch with the going-ons here.. but definitely Kejriwal's been continuously labeled a "divisive" figure >

Very "divisive" these people are. Sure. And they're even divided amongst themselves - most of these folks don't agree with each other. But that's more a symbol of independence and diversity of thought than being lost. Their core concepts are clear - way more clear than anything the media has dished up to us.

Through the extremely rough and serially slandered, lied-about and in many cases violently treated ( and even encouraged so by supposedly "responsible" and "nonviolent" media leaders) reception they have received from the mainstream media, through this very experience, we catch a glimpse of the little man behind the curtains who's pulling the levers. (reference to: Wizard of Oz).

I'm extremely happy that these people exist. More power to them and prayers for their safety in the midst of nonstop onslaught by powerful elites who prefer them dead.

Now another question I'd like to put forward. Some food for thought if you will.

If this is the mainstream media's concept and spin on Divisive Figures,

Then might there be similar play behind the "Unifying" Figures that they keep propping up?