Politics as Edited Reality

If Art can be used to supplant mundane reality, why limit its use to entertainment? Why not use it to replace reality with a more punchy reality?

Simple example from the world of politics. Instead of transmitting a speech fully, we only film the highlights. These are the moments most viewers will see anyways, so why not dispense with the cut bits altogether?
Take the State of the Union address for instance.

The president of the United States takes an hour to paint a rosy picture of our country using cherry picked statistics and canned statements about American optimism and exceptionalism. The only people who watch this drivel are the politicians forced by tradition so attend and a minority of citizens who are vested enough to watch it fully on TV. But they are not people who make the decisions.
Most senators and congresspeople have no illusions about whom they serve. Corporate donors. They are literally being paid not to vote in their constituents’ interest.
Thus, we only film five minutes necessary for a highlight reel. A master shot containing a few factoids intercut with medium shots and closeups of the president and a few reaction shots. We leave out the anemic Democratic clapping and the obnoxious Republican booing.
Save the tax payer some money and put it back into the pocket of government defense contractors where it belongs. An aging president has only a few lines to read off the teleprompter, ensuring the amphetamines last long enough to avoid senior moments to be beamed to millions of households.
For politicians, editing means less time listening to the speech means more time for culture wars, political theater and hate tweeting. For an already overworked American, a shortened speech frees up more time to fight in the culture wars, watch political theater and to retweet politicians’ hate tweet.
When things are cut down to their very essence, everyone wins. And winning, at least in our own minds, is what we Americans care about.