Jump to content

Menu

If over a million people go to D.C. shouldn't the media report on it?


Recommended Posts

This past Saturday an estimated 1.2 million people descended upon D.C. to protest government spending and certain legislation. The number is the estimate from the D.C. police even though some sources put the number at 2 million, others at "tens of thousands". Isn't this news worthy? I did not see anything on ABC, NBC, CBS on my local affiliates. I don't have cable so maybe it was reported on there. Some sources say it was the largest gathering ever on the mall....like bigger than the million man march and remember all the press that got?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree:DH and I were talking about it yesterday. It just reinforces how much the mainstream media isn't reporting on. It was the largest group they have had EVER. I've heard estimates of up to 3 million, apparently there were thousands who never could get there. Plus, there were smaller protests across the nation, for the same thing. They were expecting 50,000-60,000 in Fort Worth. I never heard how many actually showed though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most news sources indicate that there were 'thousands' or 'tens of thousands' of protesters.

 

Here is one source that reports on conflicting numbers: http://mediamatters.org/research/200909140047

 

The DC fire department unofficially estimated the number at 60,000 or 75,000. Other reports are higher but I see nothing reliable that puts the number at over a million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been paying attention to the mainstream media. The LA times did a front-page story? Awesome!

 

I was there, though. I don't know how to estimate crowd size, but WOW, it was big! I mean, big. I thought it was huge, and it turned out later that I didn't see half the crowd.

 

It was *huge*, and it was a polite, fun crowd. We had a great time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...it was reported in the New York Times, the Washington Post and in my local newspaper. I disagree with your assessment that the media failed to report on the march although I cannot comment on television news. In general I prefer "print" media to broadcast.

I don't read our local papers, no time to do so. I heard the NYT reported 500 people showed up which is laughable at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most news sources indicate that there were 'thousands' or 'tens of thousands' of protesters.

 

Here is one source that reports on conflicting numbers: http://mediamatters.org/research/200909140047

 

The DC fire department unofficially estimated the number at 60,000 or 75,000. Other reports are higher but I see nothing reliable that puts the number at over a million.

I guess the National Parks would not give an estimate because they were sued by the Million Man March for underestimating their turnout in 1995. MMM thought they had over a million, parks reported 400,000. When you compare photos of that march and this past weekend's the more recent one is much bigger if you just go by photos. The National Parks also estimated the "Stand in the Gap" march at a million and again this past weekend's looks bigger in the photos.

I guess I was just appalled that not one of my local TV stations would even mention it. Fox might have had just a snippet but even they underreported it in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most sources, apparently are running the AP story, which I believe uses the "tens of thousands" figure from the DC Fire dept. Unfortunately, the remainder of that little factoid is that this figure was from early in the day (not peak) and was, from what I was told not supposed to be an "official" number.

 

I hadn't seen anyone report over a million.

 

But, there are definitely more than 75,000 people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been paying attention to the mainstream media. The LA times did a front-page story? Awesome!

 

I was there, though. I don't know how to estimate crowd size, but WOW, it was big! I mean, big. I thought it was huge, and it turned out later that I didn't see half the crowd.

 

It was *huge*, and it was a polite, fun crowd. We had a great time.

Excellent, an eyewitness!! I love original sources!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been really busy this past week and have not had the time to check in with my usual news sources (morning paper, nightly news) and I STILL heard about it.

 

It was on the t.v. and in the newspapers enough for someone who was just "passing through" the week to catch wind of it. It was definitely on the major networks.

 

I don't really think the press is being controlled ..... but then again conspiracy theories really tick me off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This past Saturday an estimated 1.2 million people descended upon D.C. to protest government spending and certain legislation. The number is the estimate from the D.C. police even though some sources put the number at 2 million, others at "tens of thousands". Isn't this news worthy? I did not see anything on ABC, NBC, CBS on my local affiliates. I don't have cable so maybe it was reported on there. Some sources say it was the largest gathering ever on the mall....like bigger than the million man march and remember all the press that got?

 

Fox News/Glenn Beck said that up to 2 million people were present....as you stated above.

 

My dh is in a similar line of work (media). Unfortunately, alot to most (not all) of the media are liberal and biased. They are called the "gatekeepers" of information. They present WHAT they want and HOW they want to air/broadcast, to keep conservative Repubs at bay and encourage liberalism. It is mind manipulation....the media "mostly" covers what they want you know and how they want you to preceive it. That's not a 100%, BUT the majority of the time.

 

Keep your eyes and ears open...there is a "higher" reason for all of this.

 

Sheryl

<><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what you think the proper estimate is?

 

Here is one report. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html

 

 

I was there and I can tell you that in my life, I have never seen a crowd that large. The organizers themselves underestimated the crowds. It was huge and peaceful and inspiring. Here is a

snipet, and this is only the back corner of the mall where we were.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree:DH and I were talking about it yesterday. It just reinforces how much the mainstream media isn't reporting on. It was the largest group they have had EVER. I've heard estimates of up to 3 million, apparently there were thousands who never could get there. Plus, there were smaller protests across the nation, for the same thing. They were expecting 50,000-60,000 in Fort Worth. I never heard how many actually showed though.

 

20,000 in Fort Worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most news sources indicate that there were 'thousands' or 'tens of thousands' of protesters.

 

Here is one source that reports on conflicting numbers: http://mediamatters.org/research/200909140047

 

The DC fire department unofficially estimated the number at 60,000 or 75,000. Other reports are higher but I see nothing reliable that puts the number at over a million.

 

Except aerial photos of the crowd that proves the media is lying about the "small gathering of extremists and racists who aren't indicative of regular Americans."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This past Saturday an estimated 1.2 million people descended upon D.C. to protest government spending and certain legislation. The number is the estimate from the D.C. police even though some sources put the number at 2 million, others at "tens of thousands". Isn't this news worthy? I did not see anything on ABC, NBC, CBS on my local affiliates. I don't have cable so maybe it was reported on there. Some sources say it was the largest gathering ever on the mall....like bigger than the million man march and remember all the press that got?

 

Soph, the msm plans to report on the march right after they finish their report on ACORN's latest trouble. :glare: It's scary to me that the msm cherry picks the news they report on. If it in any way makes this administration look bad it's not news worthy to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politifact rates this "Pants on fire." The photo purporting to show "millions" of people rallying in DC was actually taken at at a 1997 Promise Keepers rally.

 

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/sep/14/tea-party-photo-shows-large-crowd-different-event/

 

Tara

 

I haven't seen that photo related to this story, but I did see live coverage and overhead views. Funny, the only places I can find this photo in relation to Saturday, is from leftwing sources saying the right wing is using it. No evidence of that though. Typical.

 

Here's the truth:

Edited by TXMary2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what you think the proper estimate is?

 

Here's a relatively level-headed discussion of the numbers (from a conservative leaning blog, even - imagine!) The erroneously used Promise Keepers pic is acknowledged, and some "real" event photos are posted.

 

Bottom line: "tens of thousands" is lowballing it. "Hundreds of thousands" is accurate. Possibly, but probably not approaching a million.

 

And as far as media picking it up - there was a half-column article, front page, under the fold in our local paper. I don't watch tv news, so have no idea if it was mentioned on the networks. Saw items on-line on Fox (of course) and CNN.

 

ETA: And I'm surprised that massive crowd photo is from a Promise Keepers rally? That's pretty impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soph, the msm plans to report on the march right after they finish their report on ACORN's latest trouble. :glare: It's scary to me that the msm cherry picks the news they report on. If it in any way makes this administration look bad it's not news worthy to them.

 

And James Pouillon's murder. :glare:

 

And, just in case, a quick update on Britney's kids or Hannah Montana's tshirt revealing her bra.:001_huh: Or maybe they found MJ's nose. (nuts!) And didn't Anna Nicole Smiths little girl just have a b'day.:lol:

 

......Anything but actual news of a huge movement in this nation that is going in the opposite direction of what the media elites would prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yikes, well that explains why I didn't receive an answer from a friend who took her daughter on a spur of the moment trip to the Smithsonian this weekend, lol. Poor dear, I bet she never thought those cheap airline tickets might mean a crowd of 1.2 million people!

 

I do hope she survived it all!

 

Not surprised tho about the lack of media coverage.....if it weren't for "alternative news" outlets I don't know that the American public would have a clue what was going on in the world. The major networks are too politically involved to be objective, so I'm sure if they were "told" something wasn't "newsworthy" it would be on the news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been paying attention to the mainstream media. The LA times did a front-page story? Awesome!

 

I was there, though. I don't know how to estimate crowd size, but WOW, it was big! I mean, big. I thought it was huge, and it turned out later that I didn't see half the crowd.

 

It was *huge*, and it was a polite, fun crowd. We had a great time.

 

I'm jealous!! That is really great that you went and that the crowd was so positive. Quite the opposite of what the media usually tries to represent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? It was the top story on CNN's homepage for much of the day. Even the organizers of the protest who were originally spreading the false 1 to 1.5 million rumor (misattributed to ABC news) have backed off of that claim and admitted they were in error. The only vaguely "official" estimate is the 60,000-70,000 figure from the DC fire department, but that's actually not official, either, as they've said that whoever gave the number to the media wasn't authorized to do so. It is, of course, pretty standard practice for event organizers to inflate numbers at these things. Go through the Wikipedia entry on DC rallies and you'll see that anytime there is an official number, it's much lower than the organizers' estimate. Now me personally? I'm still waiting for CNN to report on the new poll that shows 70% of doctors support a public option. Bias is very much in the eye of the beholder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soph, the msm plans to report on the march right after they finish their report on ACORN's latest trouble. :glare: It's scary to me that the msm cherry picks the news they report on. If it in any way makes this administration look bad it's not news worthy to them.

 

At least they are reporting on the truth about ACORN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol::lol::lol: Bless her. What a piece of work she is!

No kidding.

 

If it's not for her, then it's a huge conspiracy of the very few right wing radicals that are against her! They probably used some trick of mirrors to make it appear to be a larger gathering than it was!

 

 

sacrcasm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last I heard, the organizers' updated estimate is 600,000 to 700,000 thousand, which they say they got by comparing crowd photos from past events. Wonder if they're comparing crowd photos based on the official estimates of past events or the organizers' estimates ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politifact rates this "Pants on fire." The photo purporting to show "millions" of people rallying in DC was actually taken at at a 1997 Promise Keepers rally.

 

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/sep/14/tea-party-photo-shows-large-crowd-different-event/

 

Tara

 

I was going to post this - you beat me to it :D

 

I thought I'd offer this: Postmodern Protests

Why modern marches matter only to those who march.

 

I've been a Noam Chomsky fan for decades now & I've had great concerns about the media. Oddly enough though, I don't think it's controlled by any liberal cabal. I always thought it was corporate, conservative, elitist apparatchiks that held the media..... Perception sure is a funny thing.

 

Have you all read/watched Manufacturing Consent?

 

Rupert Murdoch is a very scary man to me. Your 'news' is nothing more than a product, served up to you in the most appetizing way. With the sophisticated real time polling and analysis that can now be done, they know right away what they need to do. And what certain news companies have decided works is frothing up their audience in a foam of righteous indignation so they will go clucking all over to their friends IRL and on blogs and boards about something or other. It doesn't really matter what the something or other is; the issue itself is irrelevant so long as it gets people in a tizzy. Just tune it, watch the ads, get angry and indignant, come back, watch more ads.

 

They have their audience on speed dial - and when ratings start to drop, well, someone can always find a scandal, a rumour, a hypothesis to whip up the frenzy again. In a bizarre way what some of these networks remind me of the most are personality cults. (And the speeches made by the unmentionable guy - viz. Godwin's law)

 

And it's the same on both sides of the political spectrum (though I admit to thinking one side is more egregious ....)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oddly enough though, I don't think it's controlled by any liberal cabal. I always thought it was corporate, conservative, elitist apparatchiks that held the media..... Perception sure is a funny thing.

 

:iagree:

 

They're leaning (right or left) depends more on their audience than anything else (Fox right, MSN left, CSpan none, because no one watches ;) ).

 

Maybe, if we could start marketing super cute protest shorts or some protesting super heros on Disney the protests would get more thorough coverage. Of course, we'd all have to learn the same songs and there would be a lot more of that old media magic involved...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I remember reading that the way they determine numbers at marches on the mall is by using a grid of the mall. A certain number of folks fit in each of the grids, which they compare to photos taken at the event. So, until that math is done, it's hard to know. I would think anyone could take the photos, use the grid and do the math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having seen many , many photos of the signs being carried at the event I am again saddened to see unabashed support for what is clearly the ugliest side of humanity. Although I disagreed fervently with many policies of the Bush administration I never, ever would have shown the office nor the gentleman holding it, such disrespect. Having also listened for weeks to Beck the fact that so many deny that fear of the "other" also known as racism is the driving force behind "Going back to the way the country was unified" on 9-12 is in fact driven by the real underlying concern . Before ...the neocons lost credibility and had to deal with an African American President and losing their previously held majority in the House and Senate. If unity was in fact the goal no way would the hate mongering signage carried by so many have been seen all over the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having seen many , many photos of the signs being carried at the event I am again saddened to see unabashed support for what is clearly the ugliest side of humanity.

 

:iagree:

 

Anyone who holds a picture of the president (any president) defaced to look like Hitler has immediately and completely lost my respect.

 

Tara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to post this - you beat me to it :D

 

I thought I'd offer this: Postmodern Protests

Why modern marches matter only to those who march.

 

I've been a Noam Chomsky fan for decades now & I've had great concerns about the media. Oddly enough though, I don't think it's controlled by any liberal cabal. I always thought it was corporate, conservative, elitist apparatchiks that held the media..... Perception sure is a funny thing.

 

Have you all read/watched Manufacturing Consent?

 

Rupert Murdoch is a very scary man to me. Your 'news' is nothing more than a product, served up to you in the most appetizing way. With the sophisticated real time polling and analysis that can now be done, they know right away what they need to do. And what certain news companies have decided works is frothing up their audience in a foam of righteous indignation so they will go clucking all over to their friends IRL and on blogs and boards about something or other. It doesn't really matter what the something or other is; the issue itself is irrelevant so long as it gets people in a tizzy. Just tune it, watch the ads, get angry and indignant, come back, watch more ads.

 

They have their audience on speed dial - and when ratings start to drop, well, someone can always find a scandal, a rumour, a hypothesis to whip up the frenzy again. In a bizarre way what some of these networks remind me of the most are personality cults. (And the speeches made by the unmentionable guy - viz. Godwin's law)

 

And it's the same on both sides of the political spectrum (though I admit to thinking one side is more egregious ....)

 

:iagree:

Beautiful post. And, you are my new hero. Anyone who can use Noam Chomsky and the words apparatchik and egregious properly in the same post should have some kind of "linguistic goddess" award. :cheers2:

Edited by Audrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having seen many , many photos of the signs being carried at the event I am again saddened to see unabashed support for what is clearly the ugliest side of humanity. Although I disagreed fervently with many policies of the Bush administration I never, ever would have shown the office nor the gentleman holding it, such disrespect. Having also listened for weeks to Beck the fact that so many deny that fear of the "other" also known as racism is the driving force behind "Going back to the way the country was unified" on 9-12 is in fact driven by the real underlying concern . Before ...the neocons lost credibility and had to deal with an African American President and losing their previously held majority in the House and Senate. If unity was in fact the goal no way would the hate mongering signage carried by so many have been seen all over the world.

 

There always has to be some underlying evil reason that people are standing against things that libs don't agree with. Now we play the race card. This isn't a race issue, but I suppose that is one of the comebacks of choice. I wish I had Nancy Pelosi's list...it would make it so much easier to keep track. ;)

 

I feel it quite likely that there were many very offended individuals who strongly disliked the Boston Tea Party. That served a purpose, as does this movement of concerned AMERICANS. They are only viewed as wrong by liberals who don't like that people are trying to shake things up and turn our country back to resembling what it was meant to be in the first place. Look at those photos. Those aren't a bunch of ignorant hillbillies like many would like them to be perceived (although I do understand the desire/need for liberals to spin it that way). That is A LOT of Americans...A LOT of Americans who disagree with the turn that this country has taken. I know many very intelligent, well-spoken, caring, hard-working individuals who are joining this movement...the cream of the crop!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...