Tag(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 3   News 3   Valuable 3   View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Headline (H3) on 12/14/09:     Permalink
View Article Stats      (21 comments)

Protest? What Protest? American Media Don't See What They Don't Want (You) to See

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (32 fans)   -- Page 1 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com


Copenhagen Protests flickr image by PokMcFee

A few days ago, I mentioned a line from an old science teacher: "If you can't measure it, it doesn't exist."

In what passes for corporate journalism in American, this concept has taken the form of, "If we don't report on it, it didn't happen."

That certainly was the case for the emergency protest organized by a coalition of anti-war organizations under the banner EndUSWars.org, which saw over 1000 people gather on short notice in the bitter cold on Lafayette Park opposite the White House to protest President Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan on Saturday, Dec. 12.

Not a word about this impromptu protest, which included many people who had supported the election of President Obama only a year ago, appeared in the New York Times. Nor did the Washington Post bother to mention the protest in its own back yard, not even in its Metro section pages. The other arguably national newspaper, USA Today, likewise blacked out news of the protest.

Granted, this first anti-war protest aimed at the new president within days of his receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, didn't feature any A-list speakers. Still, it did feature known names like Ralph Nader, former Rep. and 2008 Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, former Alaska Sen. and 2008 Democratic presidential contender Mike Gravel, as well as Ohio Rep. and former 2008 presidential contender Dennis Kucinich. Besides, even if a few hundred people protesting isn't that big a number, considering that past anti-war protests have numbered in the hundreds of thousands, even that constitutes a significant story in itself.


Furthermore, the Times did find newsworthy a small protest in Berkeley, CA outside the home of the chancellor of the University of California, which featured only about 60 demonstrators, and both the Times and the Post saw fit to report on a modest demonstration of 10,000 or so people in Copenhagen the same day.

There were reports on the White House protest in the American Spectator and the Washington Times, two conservative publications, and also in the Los Angeles Times, as well as on Voice of America, oddly enough.

Considering the pathetic performance of the US media in covering the run-up to the Iraq War and the handling of the Afghanistan war back in the early days of the Bush/Cheney administration, and the self-criticism that publications like the Times and the Post have made about their coverage of that period, it is nothing short of remarkable to see them doing the same thing all over again now, missing the early development of an anti-war opposition to Obama's escalation of the Afghanistan War.

What is the explanation for this behavior, which almost makes the state media in China look good?

Speaking as a reporter who worked at a number of daily newspapers back in the 1970s, I have to wonder. The news desks at the papers I worked for in those days were staffed by crusty veterans who for the most part made the decisions on what went into the paper. Certainly there were stories that higher-ups in the offices that had doors took an unseemly interest in, and these sometimes either got embarrassingly overplayed, or axed, according to the wishes of senior management (it was one such story of min getting axed that led to my protest and departure from my last daily newspaper job). But certainly a story like this one, about a demonstration in front of the White House, would not have been in that category, and I cannot imagine any of my old editors deciding that such a story didn't warrant some kind of coverage.

I find it hard to image that the senior management at the Post or the Times was leaning on the weekend news desks of those papers to black out the demonstration and hide it from the public. Rather, we've reached a sorry point, I believe, where the editors at the newsroom level are themselves completely enculturated to the idea that protest doesn't matter, unless there is violence or mass arrests or something, unrelated to the basic point of the protest.

People gathering together in front of the commander in chief's house to protest his war plans is simply not news to the arbiters of news relevance in today's American corporate journalism.

All the more reason why we need to turn to new sources of our information about what is happening in the world and in our own nation and back yards.

It is time to take back the media from the corporate hacks and flaks.

________________

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of the collectively-owned, journalist-run online newspaper www.thiscantbehappening.net. He is a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
21 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Amen by Rob Kall on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:10:32 AM
Editor Freedom Act by Kent Welton on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:06:16 AM
editors by Dave Lindorff on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:31:18 PM
Maybe the Rules haven't changed all that much by Hoss Hoss on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:46:21 AM
Yes, I think you mostly nailed it, however... by Steven Leser on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:19:20 PM
That's cool, I hope you're right by Hoss Hoss on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 3:07:32 PM
I don't buy it. by Jack Flanders on Wednesday, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:33:12 AM
I applaud your optimism about Americans by Hoss Hoss on Wednesday, Dec 16, 2009 at 1:07:48 PM
Consider the Washington Times by Jack Flanders on Thursday, Dec 17, 2009 at 8:46:38 AM
1000 is not a lot for a DC protest by Steven Leser on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:00:15 PM
SO how to explain coverage of a same day Berkeley Protest by Dave Lindorff on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:38:24 PM
I think the standard is raised as soon as you make it DC by Steven Leser on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:20:56 PM
"It Is Time!" by Joe Walsh on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:17:59 PM
2008 NY city protest by Michael Lee on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:18:48 PM
Newspaper Group Ownership Controls What You Read by Edward Ulysses Cate on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:27:42 PM
Number of people at Saturday Lafayette Park Protest by alan17b0 on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:44:03 PM
Yes, I do believe it's a news blackout by Firebird44 on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 6:58:54 PM
I agree by wagelaborer on Tuesday, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:36:10 AM
I would like to see... by Lips Malloy on Monday, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:09:03 PM
Let's protest the media itself by Perry Logan on Tuesday, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:54:02 PM
Dave, it's the owners! Rich, capitalist, CIA assets. Truth? by Richard Lee on Tuesday, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:19:57 PM