[First installment on our promised thread.]
When I was an undergrad back in Arkansas, a journalism professor who also happened to be a retired veteran newsman told the story about an incident in the northern part of the state. This would have been in the 50s or 60s, back when every decent-sized town had one or two daily papers. The sheriff and the mayor had gotten into an altercation that had led to one shooting the other in the middle of the day on the main street of town.
The following day, the paper mentioned the shooting briefly on the third page.
This was very probably the biggest thing that had ever happened in this town. Everybody knew both the killer and the victim. It was certainly discussed throughout the region for ages, but it was not something the editor wanted to talk about. It was unquestionably news; it just wasn't news the editor wanted to talk about.
I can vouch for my source here, but this is still an unverified anecdote, so you should feel free to take it with a grain of salt. Fortunately, I have a wealth of supporting evidence for an example of something very similar and quite recent.
Though written days before the No Kings event, this column is remarkably relevant.
When hundreds of thousands of Americans gathered across the US on 5 April for the “Hands Off” events protesting Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s governmental wrecking ball, much of the news media seemed to yawn.
The next day, the New York Times put a photograph, but no story, on its print front page. The Wall Street Journal’s digital homepage had it as only the 20th-most-prominent story when I checked. Fox News was dismissive; I stopped counting after I scanned 40 articles on its homepage, though there was a video with this dismissive headline: “Liberals rally against President Trump.”
The Guardian, CNN and some local news outlets paid more heed. The cable network offered live video from many American cities and a banner headline: “Millions of people protest against Trump & Musk.”
But overall, there was something of a shrug about the media coverage. It got much more attention from global news outlets than in the US.
The US media will get a chance to atone for these sins of omission this coming weekend when Americans once again get together, this time for Saturday’s “No Kings” day, which organizers describe as “a nationwide day of defiance”.
About that atonement.
Back to Sullivan.
However, if journalists consistently look the other way, the power of peaceful citizen protests can fade.
In my American Crisis newsletter two days after the 5 April protests, I offered a few theories for why the media may seem so blasé.
First, I posited, much of the mainstream media tend to view this much as Fox News does. The protesters are just the usual suspects – “liberals” – doing the predictable thing.
Second, many large media companies are afraid that prominent protest coverage will be criticized by the political right as partisan, and they can’t bear that label.
Third, corporate media decision-makers, always focused the bottom line, are fearful of losing right-leaning readers and viewers; yes, we’ll cover this, they seem to say, but quietly, since we don’t want to antagonize anyone. In an era in which Trump has attempted to bully the press into submission, through denying access and through lawsuits, cowardice and capitulation are all too common.
Coming up...
What do you expect from left-wing hotbeds like Mississippi, Arkansas, and Oklahoma?
About that 3.5% rule.
The Dog that Didn't Bark.
The Schadenfreude Parade
No comments:
Post a Comment