Hey, Media! Stop Blacking Out Progressive Protests
A sparsely attended Tea Party rally in Washington, D.C., on March 31 in support of federal spending cuts received generous media attention. One report (Slate, 3/31/11) suggested there was "at least one reporter for every three or four activists," and a Republican politician joked that there might be more journalists than activists at the event.
An antiwar rally in New York City on April 9 was in some respects very similar. Protesters were speaking out on an equally timely issue (wars in Afghanistan and Libya), and connecting them to the budget and near-government shutdown in Washington.
The difference? The ratio of activists to journalists. The antiwar protest had thousands of attendees--and received almost zero corporate media coverage.
According to the Nexis news database, the rally was apparently deemed not remotely newsworthy. The local New York Times didn't cover it--though it did have time for the D.C. Tea Party rally (4/1/11). NPR's Morning Edition (4/1/11) and the PBS NewsHour (3/31/11) reported on the Tea Party rally, which was also mentioned a few times on CNN and previewed on NBC's Today show (3/31/11).
Who did cover the antiwar rally? You could find reports from local New York outlets like the news site Gothamist (4/10/11), WABC and NY1, the left-wing Socialist Worker (4/11/11) and a handful of other sites.
What explains the wildly different treatment of the events? The organizers of the antiwar rally say they put serious resources into media outreach, and held a press conference the day before the event (which was reportedly attended by one reporter from Russia Today). The rally was framed as a way to talk about war and the budget debate, so it's hard to argue that it wasn't timely or relevant.
This isn't the first time this have focused on Tea Party events while ignoring progressive activism that was comparable or greater in size:
--In September 2009, a Tea Party march in Washington attracted tens of thousands of participants. So did a gay rights march the following month--and it elicited far less media attention (Extra!, 12/09).
--In June 2010, media demonstrated almost no interest in the progressive U.S. Social Forum, which drew thousands to Detroit. A tiny Tea Party convention in Nashville earlier in the year was widely covered (Extra!, 9/10).
--Two thousand protesters marched on the Washington offices of Koch Industries on April 5 to protest Charles and David Koch's funding of an array of right-wing interest groups. Few media were on hand to cover the event (FAIR Blog, 4/5/11)
It's time for to media explain why it seems that any Tea Party event, no matter how small, is considered far more newsworthy than progressive citizen activism.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
A sparsely attended Tea Party rally in Washington, D.C., on March 31 in support of federal spending cuts received generous media attention. One report (Slate, 3/31/11) suggested there was "at least one reporter for every three or four activists," and a Republican politician joked that there might be more journalists than activists at the event.
An antiwar rally in New York City on April 9 was in some respects very similar. Protesters were speaking out on an equally timely issue (wars in Afghanistan and Libya), and connecting them to the budget and near-government shutdown in Washington.
The difference? The ratio of activists to journalists. The antiwar protest had thousands of attendees--and received almost zero corporate media coverage.
According to the Nexis news database, the rally was apparently deemed not remotely newsworthy. The local New York Times didn't cover it--though it did have time for the D.C. Tea Party rally (4/1/11). NPR's Morning Edition (4/1/11) and the PBS NewsHour (3/31/11) reported on the Tea Party rally, which was also mentioned a few times on CNN and previewed on NBC's Today show (3/31/11).
Who did cover the antiwar rally? You could find reports from local New York outlets like the news site Gothamist (4/10/11), WABC and NY1, the left-wing Socialist Worker (4/11/11) and a handful of other sites.
What explains the wildly different treatment of the events? The organizers of the antiwar rally say they put serious resources into media outreach, and held a press conference the day before the event (which was reportedly attended by one reporter from Russia Today). The rally was framed as a way to talk about war and the budget debate, so it's hard to argue that it wasn't timely or relevant.
This isn't the first time this have focused on Tea Party events while ignoring progressive activism that was comparable or greater in size:
--In September 2009, a Tea Party march in Washington attracted tens of thousands of participants. So did a gay rights march the following month--and it elicited far less media attention (Extra!, 12/09).
--In June 2010, media demonstrated almost no interest in the progressive U.S. Social Forum, which drew thousands to Detroit. A tiny Tea Party convention in Nashville earlier in the year was widely covered (Extra!, 9/10).
--Two thousand protesters marched on the Washington offices of Koch Industries on April 5 to protest Charles and David Koch's funding of an array of right-wing interest groups. Few media were on hand to cover the event (FAIR Blog, 4/5/11)
It's time for to media explain why it seems that any Tea Party event, no matter how small, is considered far more newsworthy than progressive citizen activism.
A sparsely attended Tea Party rally in Washington, D.C., on March 31 in support of federal spending cuts received generous media attention. One report (Slate, 3/31/11) suggested there was "at least one reporter for every three or four activists," and a Republican politician joked that there might be more journalists than activists at the event.
An antiwar rally in New York City on April 9 was in some respects very similar. Protesters were speaking out on an equally timely issue (wars in Afghanistan and Libya), and connecting them to the budget and near-government shutdown in Washington.
The difference? The ratio of activists to journalists. The antiwar protest had thousands of attendees--and received almost zero corporate media coverage.
According to the Nexis news database, the rally was apparently deemed not remotely newsworthy. The local New York Times didn't cover it--though it did have time for the D.C. Tea Party rally (4/1/11). NPR's Morning Edition (4/1/11) and the PBS NewsHour (3/31/11) reported on the Tea Party rally, which was also mentioned a few times on CNN and previewed on NBC's Today show (3/31/11).
Who did cover the antiwar rally? You could find reports from local New York outlets like the news site Gothamist (4/10/11), WABC and NY1, the left-wing Socialist Worker (4/11/11) and a handful of other sites.
What explains the wildly different treatment of the events? The organizers of the antiwar rally say they put serious resources into media outreach, and held a press conference the day before the event (which was reportedly attended by one reporter from Russia Today). The rally was framed as a way to talk about war and the budget debate, so it's hard to argue that it wasn't timely or relevant.
This isn't the first time this have focused on Tea Party events while ignoring progressive activism that was comparable or greater in size:
--In September 2009, a Tea Party march in Washington attracted tens of thousands of participants. So did a gay rights march the following month--and it elicited far less media attention (Extra!, 12/09).
--In June 2010, media demonstrated almost no interest in the progressive U.S. Social Forum, which drew thousands to Detroit. A tiny Tea Party convention in Nashville earlier in the year was widely covered (Extra!, 9/10).
--Two thousand protesters marched on the Washington offices of Koch Industries on April 5 to protest Charles and David Koch's funding of an array of right-wing interest groups. Few media were on hand to cover the event (FAIR Blog, 4/5/11)
It's time for to media explain why it seems that any Tea Party event, no matter how small, is considered far more newsworthy than progressive citizen activism.