In early reporting from protests in New London today during Bush's appearance at the Coast Guard graduation, the AP (via The Hartford Courant) indicated in the lead that "Hundreds of anti-war demonstrators and war supporters lined the road to the U.S. Coast Guard Academy on Wednesday," giving the impression that there were as many on both sides of the issue.
When you read deeper into the article you realize that there were a handful of pro-Bush, pro-war supporters, and perhaps a thousand anti-war demonstrators. Further frustrating is the video which accompanies the AP report which is shot from the pro-war supporters viewpoint, and which features only one interview, with a supporter of the president. Watching the video closely, you can see the disparity. A small cluster of pro-war folks looks across the street at a large group of anti-war protesters.
Some might say the media is trying to be balanced. Ha. Those more cynical, myself included, might say that the AP is trying to portray a pro-war movement that is as strong as the anti-war sentiment. If they did something as simple as read the polls, they'd know it isn't reflecting the truth - especially here in Connecticut.
The good news is that a lot of anti-war feeling was demonstrated. The bad news - Bush trotted out the same old fairy tales, with the same old boogie man. He even had the nerve to repeat the tall tale about the planned attack on the LA library tower. Hello, is anyone in the media paying attention?
4 comments:
I swear, the media must be scared to death about what, if anything this administration can do to them. Can they make life miserable for CBS, NBC, ABC or any major newspaper? News organizations think war protestors are fringe, thus peaceniks.
What does this administration have over the major news networks? I think I know what it might be; This admin. does NOT want another media Vietnam. They saw what happened when Major News Organizations got behind an issue (no more war!) and will not allow that to happen again with this war.
I applaud the thousands of anti-war supporters who were able to be in New London, and regret that I couldn't.
This week, Congress is set to pass 160 billion dollar legislation to fund the war(timetables excluded). The only two presidential candidates who were willing to step up and say they intend to vote no to the funding were Dodd and Kucinich.
There is no question that our troops deserve to be funded with better armor and equipment, but continual funding of a blank-check war has to stop.
Anti-war activists need to hold their representatives accountable this week. Saying no to war means saying no to funding war. Supporting our troops means bringing them home.
We've already spent 300 billion and lost 3400 soldiers. Let's pass legislation to fund the plane ticket home.
As to what control this administration has over major media?
Corporate ownership, FCC rules, access, and 24 hours of time to fill.
Post a Comment