I have an objection to the OP (the page at bbc.co.uk) and I would like you to acknowledge that my objection is valid. "China is using an increasing number of paid 'internet commentators' in a sophisticated attempt to control public opinion," begins the BBC page. Not a word on the page suggests that this goes on in any other country except China. But the U.S. and the U.K. also have "an increasing number of paid 'internet commentators'" -- including the writer of the BBC page, who works for the U.K. government!
And I humbly suggest that the reason references to "the Establishment" and "the Man" sound laughable to you is that the faction making those references has since the 1960s completely trounced the referent and are in control of the New York Times, the universities, etc, which I suggest are the central organs of power in the U.S. because of their influence on public opinion and public discourse, which in the U.S. and the U.K comes not from police powers but from gravitas, credibility and the ability hold attention -- and that gravitas, credibility and attention-holding are maintained by whole occupational groups of highly skilled "paid 'internet commentators'".
And I humbly suggest that the reason references to "the Establishment" and "the Man" sound laughable to you is that the faction making those references has since the 1960s completely trounced the referent and are in control of the New York Times, the universities, etc, which I suggest are the central organs of power in the U.S. because of their influence on public opinion and public discourse, which in the U.S. and the U.K comes not from police powers but from gravitas, credibility and the ability hold attention -- and that gravitas, credibility and attention-holding are maintained by whole occupational groups of highly skilled "paid 'internet commentators'".