Guest guest Posted November 1, 2002 Report Share Posted November 1, 2002 the local newspaper wouldn't print this letter because it was " too long " . I have other theories. It seems odd to me how little the mainstream media has said about the anti-war rallies across the country and the world last saturday, and when I have heard about it, in articles and news clips, the numbers of demonstrators seemed smaller than what we originally heard via cell phone at the rally in Lawrence. Our contact was in Washington, and said that the estimates were at least one hundred thousand, much higher than the & quot;tens of thousands & quot; that I kept hearing afterwards. I have to wonder the reason for this. The WTO protest in Seattle in 1999 drew a similar or lesser number of participants, between fifty- and one hundred thousand, and was all over the news, while these recent protests were mentioned so briefly, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people haven't heard. Does the corporate media not want us to know how much of an anti-war sentiment there is in our country? Perhaps they want to be able to label all activists as violent mobs, as they did with Seattle (unfortunately, many protests do involve some amount of violence, but this can't be held against each individual), but have trouble doing this when we are marching in mass numbers, promoting non-violent resolution to disputes. The number of companies who own the mainstream media has been shrinking. Today I heard that there were nine. & quot;News & quot; as we know it is the current events that these people think are important--to their own agenda--and not offensive to those with money and power, watered down to be spoonfed to unsuspecting citizens. Now more than ever I have to remind myself of what my mother would tell me when I was a kid reading the headlines of supermarket check-out line tabloids: & quot;You can't believe everything you read. & quot; We get such a skewed version of current events that it is very difficult to know what is really going on around us. I encourage everyone to look past the headlines and news flashes, and do some research for yourself, to form your own opinions, and not blindly take the ones offered to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 1, 2002 Report Share Posted November 1, 2002 Hi Josey Very good advice at the end there. We have the same problems here, although the media is at last acknowledging 400,000 at the last Don't Bomb Iraq march. There are plenty of good websites to get alternative information from, and in the UK the Stop The War Coalition, Socialist Workers Party etc. all have information that you don't get elsewhere. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.394 / Virus Database: 224 - Release 03/10/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 1, 2002 Report Share Posted November 1, 2002 of course the media is downplaying any protests the media is run by basically 6 companies, and those companies care about: money maintaining the status quo etc the NY times originally reported that only 10,000 were in DC, and when the reporter called in later in the day that there were over 100,000, but the editor refused to run it they ended up running it like 3 days later.... fraggle " Josey " <cthulhu_23 wrote: >the local newspaper wouldn't print this letter because it was " too >long " . I have other theories. > > It seems odd to me how little the mainstream media has said about >the anti-war rallies across the country and the world last saturday, >and when I have heard about it, in articles and news clips, the >numbers of demonstrators seemed smaller than what we originally heard >via cell phone at the rally in Lawrence. Our contact was in >Washington, and said that the estimates were at least one hundred >thousand, much higher than the & quot;tens of thousands & quot; that I >kept hearing afterwards. I have to wonder the reason for this. The >WTO protest in Seattle in 1999 drew a similar or lesser number of >participants, between fifty- and one hundred thousand, and was all >over the news, while these recent protests were mentioned so briefly, >I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people haven't heard. Does the >corporate media not want us to know how much of an anti-war sentiment >there is in our country? Perhaps they want to be able to label all >activists as violent mobs, as they did with Seattle (unfortunately, >many protests do involve some amount of violence, but this can't be >held against each individual), but have trouble doing this when we >are marching in mass numbers, promoting non-violent resolution to >disputes. The number of companies who own the mainstream media has >been shrinking. Today I heard that there were nine. & quot;News & quot; >as we know it is the current events that these people think are >important--to their own agenda--and not offensive to those with money >and power, watered down to be spoonfed to unsuspecting citizens. Now >more than ever I have to remind myself of what my mother would tell >me when I was a kid reading the headlines of supermarket check-out >line tabloids: & quot;You can't believe everything you read. & quot; >We get such a skewed version of current events that it is very >difficult to know what is really going on around us. I encourage >everyone to look past the headlines and news flashes, and do some >research for yourself, to form your own opinions, and not blindly >take the ones offered to you. > > > >To send an email to - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 1, 2002 Report Share Posted November 1, 2002 what i think is really scary is that, while people like us will go out of our way to find alternative media sources, most people don't even consider or realize how corrupt the system is, and don't think to look outside of it, making it ever harder for humans to organize against corporate takeover of everything. Hehe... is it obvious I've been on a noam chomsky kick lately? ;-) , EBbrewpunx@c... wrote: > > of course the media is downplaying any protests > the media is run by basically 6 companies, and those companies care about: > money > maintaining the status quo > etc > the NY times originally reported that only 10,000 were in DC, and when the reporter called in later in the day that there were over 100,000, but the editor refused to run it > they ended up running it like 3 days later.... > fraggle > > " Josey " <cthulhu_23@h...> wrote: > > >the local newspaper wouldn't print this letter because it was " too > >long " . I have other theories. > > > > It seems odd to me how little the mainstream media has said about > >the anti-war rallies across the country and the world last saturday, > >and when I have heard about it, in articles and news clips, the > >numbers of demonstrators seemed smaller than what we originally heard > >via cell phone at the rally in Lawrence. Our contact was in > >Washington, and said that the estimates were at least one hundred > >thousand, much higher than the & quot;tens of thousands & quot; that I > >kept hearing afterwards. I have to wonder the reason for this. The > >WTO protest in Seattle in 1999 drew a similar or lesser number of > >participants, between fifty- and one hundred thousand, and was all > >over the news, while these recent protests were mentioned so briefly, > >I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people haven't heard. Does the > >corporate media not want us to know how much of an anti-war sentiment > >there is in our country? Perhaps they want to be able to label all > >activists as violent mobs, as they did with Seattle (unfortunately, > >many protests do involve some amount of violence, but this can't be > >held against each individual), but have trouble doing this when we > >are marching in mass numbers, promoting non-violent resolution to > >disputes. The number of companies who own the mainstream media has > >been shrinking. Today I heard that there were nine. & quot;News & quot; > >as we know it is the current events that these people think are > >important--to their own agenda--and not offensive to those with money > >and power, watered down to be spoonfed to unsuspecting citizens. Now > >more than ever I have to remind myself of what my mother would tell > >me when I was a kid reading the headlines of supermarket check-out > >line tabloids: & quot;You can't believe everything you read. & quot; > >We get such a skewed version of current events that it is very > >difficult to know what is really going on around us. I encourage > >everyone to look past the headlines and news flashes, and do some > >research for yourself, to form your own opinions, and not blindly > >take the ones offered to you. > > > > > > > >To send an email to - > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 1, 2002 Report Share Posted November 1, 2002 Oh,by the way, as my response to corporate media, I think I'll start a zine. If anybody is interested in contributing any art, writing, (political or personal), photos of events, vegan recipes, ads for zines or activist groups, web addresses, etc, email me. We need to fight back! , EBbrewpunx@c... wrote: > > of course the media is downplaying any protests > the media is run by basically 6 companies, and those companies care about: > money > maintaining the status quo > etc > the NY times originally reported that only 10,000 were in DC, and when the reporter called in later in the day that there were over 100,000, but the editor refused to run it > they ended up running it like 3 days later.... > fraggle > > " Josey " <cthulhu_23@h...> wrote: > > >the local newspaper wouldn't print this letter because it was " too > >long " . I have other theories. > > > > It seems odd to me how little the mainstream media has said about > >the anti-war rallies across the country and the world last saturday, > >and when I have heard about it, in articles and news clips, the > >numbers of demonstrators seemed smaller than what we originally heard > >via cell phone at the rally in Lawrence. Our contact was in > >Washington, and said that the estimates were at least one hundred > >thousand, much higher than the & quot;tens of thousands & quot; that I > >kept hearing afterwards. I have to wonder the reason for this. The > >WTO protest in Seattle in 1999 drew a similar or lesser number of > >participants, between fifty- and one hundred thousand, and was all > >over the news, while these recent protests were mentioned so briefly, > >I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people haven't heard. Does the > >corporate media not want us to know how much of an anti-war sentiment > >there is in our country? Perhaps they want to be able to label all > >activists as violent mobs, as they did with Seattle (unfortunately, > >many protests do involve some amount of violence, but this can't be > >held against each individual), but have trouble doing this when we > >are marching in mass numbers, promoting non-violent resolution to > >disputes. The number of companies who own the mainstream media has > >been shrinking. Today I heard that there were nine. & quot;News & quot; > >as we know it is the current events that these people think are > >important--to their own agenda--and not offensive to those with money > >and power, watered down to be spoonfed to unsuspecting citizens. Now > >more than ever I have to remind myself of what my mother would tell > >me when I was a kid reading the headlines of supermarket check-out > >line tabloids: & quot;You can't believe everything you read. & quot; > >We get such a skewed version of current events that it is very > >difficult to know what is really going on around us. I encourage > >everyone to look past the headlines and news flashes, and do some > >research for yourself, to form your own opinions, and not blindly > >take the ones offered to you. > > > > > > > >To send an email to - > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.