"Conspiracy"???? Ha! Ha! There is that word again, a word which has become a standard way of casting doubt upon virtually any argument, it seems, but without meeting that argument through anything but innuendo.
Who is talking about a conspiracy? I'm talking about clever marketing. I'm talking about a $ySStem of Big Business that looks after its own present and future interests. There are a few people, a few very rich people, who own the main media outlets (meaning TV and radio and the press). Those main media outlets are not totally disinterested in the process of reporting "the News" because their owners are not totally disinterested in how it affects the status quo. They'd rather not see someone like Kucinich, for instance, get equal coverage in debates or in the News, because they don't like his policies one bit! So he gets shut out.
Is that a conspiracy? Or is that just some very well-positioned business people doing business in the way that they feel will benefit them most?
Anything that is organized behind closed doors by more than one person, and which the public is NOT fully informed on at the time is technically a conspiracy. (that doesn't necessarily mean it's BAD, but it's still a conspiracy) It fits the literal definition of a conspiracy. So any business decision which is made behind closed doors by two or more people is technically a conspiracy, as is any military decision or any other decision made behind closed doors by two or more people. There are probably at least a trillion conspiracies happening in the world RIGHT now, and you may be engaged in one or two yourself! ;-)
But when you question someone's theory by calling it a "conspiracy theory" you are simply engaging in a kind of manipulative rhetoric which is a bit like playing the "race card" or pulling the "anti-semitic" card. It obfuscates the discussion by treating the other person's premise as if it automatically was in the realm of wearing tinfoil hats and believing in lizard-people who secretly control the government from underground bases beneath Greenland.
In short, it's a mild form of implied ridicule. That is not a legitimate way of discussing anything.