Media coverage of protests this morning SUCKS

[gristy]

CNN's article is from Friday, but dated yesterday: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/03/20/iraq.main/index.html

<snip>
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Antiwar rallies were being held around the world Saturday, the day after protests in Baghdad marked the anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

In the United States, rallies were held in Los Angeles, California; Fayetteville, North Carolina; and Crawford, Texas, where President Bush has a ranch.

Demonstrators against the Iraq war gathered in England, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and Australia.(Full story)

In Cairo, Egypt, protesters burned a U.S. flag and called Bush a liar, though riot police far outnumbered the protesters.

<snip>

the United States, rallies were also scheduled Saturday for Los Angeles, California; Fayetteville, North Carolina; and Crawford, Texas, where Bush has a ranch.

From the same friggin article. And I guess NYC isn't worth a mention...

NO mention on msnbc's front page: www.msnbc.msn.com

NO mention on cbs's front page: www.cbs.com

Fuck, I gotta get going. Add your own, folks.

[Chitown_Dem]

1. one little paragraph

Obviously downplaying it here.

In addition to NYC, they didn't bother to mention Chicago, as well as the Twin Cities and Denver, and probably numerous others.

[Chitown_Dem]

2. local radio

gave Chicago's protest about a 10-second mention this morning. It was sort of an "oh, and by the way" kind of thing.

[underpants]

5. Welcome to DU -Pics from protests Chicago and.........

Chicago


Hollywood


Crawford


San Francisco

[boobooday]

3. Oh, by the way

Hundreds of thousands of citizens took to the streets!

But now, we've got something really important: a poodle who can tango!!!

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[Bread and Circus]

4. Speak it, brother...or sister.....

I totally agree. I love your poodle line.

[H2O Man]

6. You are right.

The "major media's" coverage is strangely inaccurate. The news film of the protest in NYC, for example, showed HUGE crowds, but a "source" estimated "around 40,000." Not close. It's the old effort to get the audience to believe their ears but doubt their eyes. But! There are now hundreds (even thousands) of better news sources. We have the ability to access the truth. And the truth is that there were huge crowds of patriotic Americans taking to the streets to protest the war/bush administration. And it wasn't a "fringe" group of anti-american WSWP people that main-stream America has little or nothing in common with! No! It WAS main-stream America! And that is upsetting enough for the heads of the media/power elite that they HAVE to distort it! Because to report it FAIR AND ACCURATELY would take the fuzz right off their peach! So do NOT go by their definitions: re-define ALL aspects of this effort to reclaim America! Then, and only then do we see that the distorted media coverage is indeed part of the victory of yesterday's marches! I love the smell of distorted media coverage in the morning. It reminds me of victory!

[RedSock]

9. print copy of new york times

One little sentence on the front page as a teaser thing:

"Protest Marches
Demonstrators in Manhattan and cities around the world protested the Iraq occupation. Page 27."

And page twenty friggin seven isn't even in the main news section. It is part of the Metro section. And it's on the 3rd page of that section.

Two pictures and the story covers the entire page above the fold.

Big deal. ... I'll bet the Post's coverage is easier to find.

[Malva Zebrina]

7. CNN reported it

then saw fit to add on--it was a small percentage compared to last years protests.

[NuttyFluffers]

8. same same

was scouring the news channels saturday for anything on the protests around the world and all it was was just a 10 second blurb - on every news channel. the only one i saw with a "lengthy segment" on it was CNN who had around 20-30 second blurb.

as much as those photos renewed my faith in humanity and all, i'm gonna go out on a limb here. protests are now impotent affairs in the face of modern corporate media.

i really wish it'd have an impact, but when flavor-of-the-month pieces can drown out this stuff with *days* of worthless overspeculation then there's no hope in using protests as a useful tool in america anymore.

perhaps the last honest choice left is letter campaigns and phone calls. we must take all this wonderful creative energy and turn it into something so frighteningly destructive to their pocketbooks that these people have no choice but to obey - just like the reactionary movement is doing. there needs to be mobilized handwritten letter floods, phone trees of relevant articles, active boycotts against certain companies/locations with swarms of opinion letters to their local newspapers.

there comes a time sometimes when fire can only be fought with fire. the level of tension in USA is so high, any "soothing, cooling water" of "love, understanding, and empathy" is easily boiled away. there is nothing left. our back is against the wall, time to resort to the enemies' (NONVIOLENT!) tactics - before it is too late...

[H2O Man]

11. any talk of actions that are other than 100% nonviolent

is talk of how to improve bush's chances of actually winning an election. In fact, on an earlier post on here, OKNancy discusses this issue in a beautiful way. In the 1960s and '70s, the "enemy" often had agents infiltrate the anti-war movement, the Black Panthers, the American Indian Movement, the Black Muslims, and even Dr. King's movement. It's pretty easy to spot them. They are the first to say that non-violent protests don't work, that "we" need to resort to this violent tactic, or that one. To the exact extent that they create violence, they discredit the anti-war, anti-hate, pro-democratic movement. The soothing cool waters of love, understanding, and empathy are indeed the weapons of choice, if indeed our choice is victory. I want to make one point very clear: anyone who advocates violence is either an agent of the enemy, totally ignorant of what urban warfare actually is, or a sociopath who delights in fires that destroy human beings. The second group often young and restless souls who watch too much tv. They need to rely on the wisdom of the older folks here. The agents and sociopaths should simply stay at a local republican rally, where they will be right at home.

[flamingpie2500]

10. Apparently only worth mentioning if they turn violent.

You can be sure that THEN they will get coverage.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

12. In all honesty, what did you expect?