| |
Protesters Get Short Shrift in Post-9/11 America
Published
on Thursday, September 19, 2002 in the Toronto
Star
|
|
Protesters
Get Short Shrift in Post-9/11 America
|
|
by
Antonia Zerbisias
|
| |
|
A COUPLE OF months ago, my friend Jena, a politically aware 17-year-old who
has such a '60s fixation she goes to Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young concerts, lamented
how, when I was her age, there were "much better things to protest."
Hunh? Had she missed the anti-globalization demonstrations in Seattle, Quebec
city, Genoa? But Jena waved those off, not convinced battling the corporatization
of the planet was as romantic as protesting the war in Vietnam or marching for
civil rights.
Not that I blame her. Media images of G-8 Summit protests are nearly always covered
in one of two dismissive ways. Either the very few instances of violence are blown
up big time for the news, or the more fanciful demonstrations (the puppets, the
costumes, the bare bums) are mocked by the late-night comics. The protesters can't
win: Their message is almost always subverted by the media.
Which could explain why there don't seem to be any protests against what seems
to be the inevitable war with Iraq. What with Americans so divided, you'd think
there would be people greeting President George W. Bush on his tub-thumping, Republican
fundraising tour, not just with flags, but also with placards.
But if there are demonstrators, the cameras don't show them.
This is standard media practice, however. These camera ops are stage-managed so
tightly that journalists don't get a chance to capture what's happening on the
periphery. And networks, always pinching pennies, won't send second crews to cover
the people instead of the political message of the day, now conveniently displayed
on that big blue background screen that must travel with Bush nowadays.
But don't think that the news nets would have much time for protesters or public
dissent, if only the White House weren't so cleverly manipulative. Two cases in
point:
Last Thursday on CNN, anchor Kyra Phillips introduced a report by Washington correspondent
Bob Franken who said that the Rev. Jesse Jackson was leading a march on the Justice
Dept.
"(T)hey are complaining about the loss of civil liberties, and the loss of access
to this administration," said Franken. "It is the coalition of the same civil
rights, labour, women's rights groups that we have known for decades now."
He then gave Jackson about 10 seconds. To my ears he sounded awfully dismissive.
But it got worse: A few seconds later Phillips gave at least three minutes to
a story about a two-legged dog.
The same day on MSNBC's Buchanan & Press, Sara Flounders of the Washington-based
International Action Center (http://www.iacenter.org),
which is co-ordinating a national day of protest for Oct. 26, was subjected to
a tirade.
"I looked at your organization," Pat Buchanan said. "It's not simply against an
invasion of Iraq. You are against the oppression of gay, bisexual and trans people.
You want America to be free of war and racism ... You're in favour of affirmative
action. Aren't you just a hard leftist organization that is anti-anything Mr.
Bush does?"
Now, I am not entirely convinced Buchanan actually believed what he was saying
— but he has to play a right-wing nut for the cameras. Despite that, MSNBC allowed
Flounders to get her message out before giving her the hook a few short minutes
later.
Then yesterday, wonder of wonders, Medea Benjamin and Diane Wilson, two ordinary-looking
women, stood up and interrupted U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who was
making his case against Iraq before Congress.
"Inspections, not war!" they cried, before being hustled away by Capitol police.
Both CNN and MSNBC replayed the scene, remarking on how Rumsfeld recovered "with
aplomb" in "a quick comeback" about how the women would not be able to express
their opinions in Saddam Hussein's country.
Later CNN interviewed the two women, all but berating them for interrupting the
proceedings. Anchor Leon Harris never once picked up on what they wanted to hear:
"How many civilians would be killed? How would they protect us against the backlash
of anti-Americanism? Why is this all about oil? Why is it coming up now? Can't
we wait until after elections? Why is the Bush administration stopping this inspection
process? Why don't we put it back in the hands of the Security Council?"
"We see you did not get locked up today," concluded Harris. "We will see whether
or not your luck holds out. Thank you very much for talking with us this morning.
We will see how this all plays out."
Seems like a foregone conclusion to me.
Antonia Zerbisias appears once a week. You can reach her at azerbis@thestar.ca.
Copyright 1996-2002. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited
###
|
 Printer Friendly Version
E-Mail This Article
|
|
|
