Howard Kurtz hosts a Saturday morning show on CNN called "Reliable Sources". He is touted as a "Media Critic" and every Sunday, his show critiques the mainstream media and how it behaved the previous week.
In running a short teaser on CNN this Saturday afternoon, Mr. Kurtz stated that he believes that Fox might have gone a little over the line in their promotion of the Tea parties, but that there is a real legitimate movement out there, and that anytime American Citizens gather, it should be covered. He felt that the other media channels didn't do a very good job of making that known, and that many opted to ridicule the tea parties instead.
And so one has to wonder why Howard Kurtz doesn't ask himself why he didn't report on the US Iraq Protests when they happened back in 2003. He certainly was doing what he does now, and in fact, was given quite a platform to speak on in reference to the going-ons of the Iraq War as they happened via his Washington Post column.
What was he saying then?
Howard Kurtz: Lots of commentators have talked about the TIMING of the current Iraq obsession and whether, intentionally or otherwise, it might shift the campaign debate from the economy, Social Security, etc. But I don't think many people believe the administration would take the huge risk of committing American troops to topple Saddam just for some kind of short-term political benefit. This is pretty risky stuff we're talking about.
On March 11, 2003, Howard Kurtz, who was literally absent from any meaningful comments referencing to any US Iraq War Protests, was quoted having said....." The European media, by contrast, have been very skeptical of the war, very aggressive of covering the anti-war movement," explained Kurtz, "and some people think they have a strain of anti-Americanism -- or at least anti-George Bush."
This was a story that ran in reference to the "missing news" on Iraq War Protests in the United States:
Here are some other "gems" From Howard Kurtz
War-protest news missing in action
Tom Plate, Tribune Media Services
Friday, January 17, 2003
On Jan. 11, tens of thousands participated in an anti-war protest in Los Angeles, and a similar turnout is expected in San Francisco on Saturday. Anti- war rallies are also to be held in Orange County, near the Richard Nixon Presidential Library, and in Washington.
The demographics of these events are telling. Showing up these days: Not just the usual kooky cadres of semi-professional protest junkies, anti- globalization crusaders and whacked-out conspiracy theorists but protesters from the solid middle class as well. It's time for Washington to start worrying.
So should the U.S. media. They have been slow to pick up on the story -- as decades ago when the establishment media was late to comprehend the dimensions of the tumult and divisiveness prompted by the Vietnam War.
In its just-out issue, CJR, the leading serious media journalism review that's published at prestigious Columbia University in New York, gives failing grades on this story to media outlets from the Washington Post and the New York Times to the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the San Diego Union-Tribune.
The missing story is that a rapidly growing number of centrist Americans oppose the Bush administration's unilateral threats against Iraq and its bizarre approach to North Korea. They also oppose its domestic law-enforcement and intelligence methods for combating terrorism.
Kurtz found "irony" in Obama's Baghdad visit because "Obama ran against the Iraq war"
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).