two questions

Dear Teacher,

I do not quite understand the meanings of the bracketed parts of the following two sentences. Would you please give me a hand?

1. Widely diffused as simply a matter of common sense, this 'nationalized
syntax of hegemony' is evoked [by newsworkers claiming to speak to and
for the nation as a homeland or 'imagined community'.]

2. This conclusion, when expressed in printed or television journalism, was
generally held to be, if not downright mischievous, [then certainly non-
objective, within the terms of reference of a newspaper, on the grounds
that it was proclaimed as a point of view.]


Thanks a bunch.

[Tdol]

The newsworkers claim to speak on behalf of the nation and address the nation too, thus enforcing the concept of an imagined community of a nation, presuambly conforming to a synthesised view, and is a hegemony because it stifles alternative views.

I don't know what the conclusion was, but it was given as a point of view, so was regarded as subjective or troublesome. What conclusion are they referring to?