Last night’s CBS radio news lead story concerned 2 dozen protesters at the White House. I thought to myself, why is that news? There must be any number of issues about which 2 dozen people feel strongly.
A poster on a right-wing web site had a similar observation
I gather that today’s demonstration is featured on CSPAN.
INHO this peace demonstration is being given far more attention than it deserves. Why?
Well, now, from the opposite viewpoint…
There are demonstrations building all over the country today. Check out your Drudge. I am bouncing from CNN to Faux News, etc., and what do I see?
Fascintaing reports on ant colonies on the space station. In depth reporting about the shoe bomber. Lots and lots about affirmative action.
And not one word, in two hours, about the demonstrations.
Maybe they just didn’t happen. Yes, that must be it. The clarity of GeeDubya’s wisdom has finally settled the issue.
Yes, that must be it.
What the hell are you talking about? At this exact moment, the anti-war demonstrations are the lead article, with picure, on both CNN.com and Foxnews.com. CNN even has one of those stupid “interactive” maps they use for way too many articles.
I don’t understand the question. Clearly, “Man Bites Dog.”
With the whole 280,000,000 people in the country in comfortable lockstep with Dubya as he sends the boys off to avenge his Daddy, finding a few people who not only disagree, but are willing to do it publicly, is NEWS. (It may not be particularly relevant news, but then, why have all the various channels been running leads on one California disappearance when there are dozens of people who disappear each day? “Pregnant suburban lady disappears at Christmas” makes good headlines.)
The anti-war movement is indeed small and vacuous.
CONNECT THE DOTS, PEOPLE: they are getting significant national press because the right-wing media wants to make anything left-of-center look ‘out-of-touch’.
I was participating today in a demonstration in Albuquerque- over 1,000 folks! right in front of the Air Force base. The city police unexpectedly blocked off the very busy street for us, and I thought that was a wonderful thing for them to do 
There were a lot of vets, a lot of American flags and the whole atmosphere was more truly patriotic and wholesome than almost anywhere else I’d been to in recent memory. Amy Goodman (from NPR in New York) spoke and this was the first time I’d heard her- she could kick Ann Coulter’s butt in no time flat (I would love to see that).
Why do you hate America so much? Anna Nicole Smith? Carrot Top? Starbucks?
If you’re talking to me- no, I don’t hate America! I think Dubya and Co. are the traitors in this situation- picking a fight with another country (Iraq) whose bark is much worse than its bite; taking it upon himself to declare war w/o consulting Congress or the advice of seasoned military and diplomatic experts. And what happened to the war on terrorism? It’s as if Osama had never existed now. It’s because I love my country that I don’t just shut up and say “baa” at this time.
Dear Sweet:
Whooooosh!
Your pal,
elucidator
There were also rallies and demonstrations in pretty much every major European and Asian city. So I would say, yes, this is news.
And to quote Mark Twain:
Same thing being done a hundred years later.
It certainly was news on TV here tonight, tens of thousands demonstrating across America, Asia and Europe. It looked like considerably more than “2 dozen protestors”, it looked every bit like tens of thousands.
For some reason nothing happened in Australia (or not that I heard of or was mentioned on the news). Maybe we will get to it next weekend.
You should realize the OP works in the insurance business and they have a very hard time admitting people’s claims and reduce them just out of routine custom.
From CNN:
"In Washington, D.C., and San Francisco, California, at the two largest peace rallies, the crowds were urged on by international peace activists, religious leaders, members of Congress, actors and musicians.
At least tens of thousands of people rallied on the Mall in Washington, and a similar-size group crowded downtown San Francisco."
Yeah, december, that’s pretty close to “2 dozen.” :rolleyes:
Your biases are showing again, december, and it’s not a pretty picture when you have to lie to try to make a point.
Good one, sailor. The story about 2 dozen demonstrators was something that happened on Friday, the day before the “big” demonstration.
However, Saturday’s demonstration in Washington wasn’t big, as demonstrations go. The Times said thousands. WaPo said tens of thousands. BTW the Times ran the story as a minor headline on the front page.
Compare this with a pro-Israel rally which drew over 42,000 to Washington, DC on April 15, 2002. It was the largest pro-Israel rally in history. Not only was it not covered live on TV, it was barely reported afterwards. This rally was ignored by ABC News and given only a few seconds by CBS News.
So, yesterday’s peace rally did indeed get disproportionate news coverage.
My answers to the OP:
I am particularly interested in point #2. Going to a rally isn’t much of a commitment. The rally wasn’t particularly large. It’s merely a staged event. Congress has already authorized Bush to take action. Why did the media see this moderate-sized rally as big, big news?
Not denying that the media have their own preferences on what they consider newsworthy but also the size of a demonstration, in and by itself, is not the only criterium. There are many considerations when deciding what’s news. One other consideration are the importance of the issue in people’s minds. 20,000 people demonstrating for some issue which most people don’t care about is not the same thing as 20,000 demonstrating for something everyone is talking about. During the shootings in DC recently I was amazed at what passed for news. Things which were of no interest whatsoever were suddenly in the news because they were related to the shootings and everyone was paranoid about that.
The fact that the demonstration was one of many held across the country and around the world also counts. In total there were many more people that in the demonstration you mentioned. many times more.
Well, December, if I understand anything about the actuarial business, it consists in the creative interpretation of data to advise one’s clients as to what’s a safe bet in terms of statistical results and what is too much of a risk without an extraordinary inducement to bet.
And if I were running an insurance company, if you applied the analytical skills I’ve seen you use in Great Debates to the data I need to have properly analyzed to set my premiums accurately, I suspect I’d be the biggest crash since Enron and WorldCom.
I have changed my mind on a lot of things since coming to this board, trading ignorance of the truth for reasoned exposition analysis of the facts and their implications, testimony by individuals as to the impact of various policies on their lives, and so on. That’s what “fighting ignorance” is all about.
If you care to demonstrate at some point that media bias is selectively playing up one issue and playing another one down, I’ll listen. But I will never be convinced of anything by the selective focusing on skew-the-curve incidents and the blatant disingenuous misinterpretation of the issues underlying them that appear to be your stock in trade here.
I realize that this seems to be very much like an attack on you. It is intended, rather, as a denouncement of the methodology you use. If you are accomplishing anything with these threads, it’s the encouragement of the undecided to take stances opposite to those you espouse.
On second thought, keep it up. Anything that combats ignorance and causes people to take stands where the taking of a stand is a moral imperative is a good thing. You may be single-handedly causing the margin of victory that liberal Democrats will need in 2004, by showing the extremes that their opposition will go to in an effort to discredit them. Good work, sir! :rolleyes:
december: "Compare this with a pro-Israel rally which drew over 42,000 to Washington, DC on April 15, 2002
Ï just saw some footage of the one in DC and it most definitely looked like more than 40 or 50,000 to me. Add similar demonstrations across the country and around the world and I would say yes, these demonstrations objectively deserve more coverage. Also because they are about an issue which interests people more as is the coming war.
I have a question I hope somebody can answer:
What is the tone and agenda at these demonstrations?
Is it a “Bush is an evil war-monger” kind of thing?
Or, is it a “We don’t want war, so why won’t Saddam cooperate with the UN?”
Or, is it sadness and regret that war seems likely?
Who is being blamed, and what is being suggested as an alternative at these protests?
I am quite sure they are first and foremost for peace in general terms (which I agree is kind of pointless unless you provide alternative ways of resolving the conflicts), then “Bush is an evil war-monger” because they feel the easiest way to not have a war is to not start one.
and maybe they are saying… give peace a chance.
Tell me that’s not stuck in your head now.