My notebook made me a marked man. “Are you a journalist?” asked a young woman, peeking over my shoulder. By then, the first half of the huge anti-war parade slowly proceeding down Broadway had disbanded into Washington Square Park, where hundreds of young marchers were holding a spontaneous protest carnival. There were people kneeling with chalk sticks to small draw peace… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (23)Page 1 of 1 pagesHey journalist! You got it just about right. ;)
Posted by John Zorabedian on Mar 28, 2003 at 1:47 AM For the past twenty years Saddam has brutalised his people; killed, tortured, mutilated his opponents and their families. Twelve years ago, the Iraqis, pleading, desperate for his removal were tragically let down. And now that, at last, and many years too late, the US and a few supporters are doing something about it, the greenies and lefties and assorted protest mobs spring into action, and try to stop the liberation. They draw peace symbols and hold placards. Thanks a bunch guys.
Where were you when the Iraqis needed you? Why have you never in the past 20 years marched against Saddam and his brutes? Self-indulgence is no solution.
Posted by Arturo Ziegler on Mar 28, 2003 at 5:10 AM Hey Arturo Ziegler from New Zealand— Hold it right there…right now! Most lefties have been against Sadaam Hussein ever since the U.S. encouraged the rise of this thug within the Ba’ath party (the U.S. did this in order to smash the left within that party.) Stop the b.s. caricature of leftists as naive hippies!
Posted by Lefty on Mar 28, 2003 at 5:28 AM Hey Lefty, lay down the bong and before you respond like that! You mean to tell me, the lefties had some great insight into the kind of person Saddam would turn out to be? HA! Bold faced lie!
HILLARY CLINTON AND THE MAJORITY OF US SENATORS SUPPORT THE WAR IN IRAQ.
Arturo Ziegler is right on. We should have been in there in 1991.
Posted by MILLI VANILLI on Mar 28, 2003 at 6:18 PM Will, This is wonderful..It says everything I wanted to say about the march, but didn’ know how. Thank you!
—-Hilary Carr
Posted by Hilary Carr on Mar 29, 2003 at 1:33 PM Excellent story—in the opinion of an InTheseTimes subscriber who attended the rally.
Posted by Andrew Weinstein on Mar 29, 2003 at 2:05 PM yeah, yeah, tv is “severely limited,” can’t convey the street protests, and so on.
but your focus is *still* on television, on the tv anchors, on tv fashion, tv diction, tv style.
if american journalists stopped being so self-centered, self-congratulatory and so concerned with the coverage and fashion of their “industry,” perhaps we would read more articles about:
* how you should invite your neighbors to join you in smashing your tv set in the street
* how being informed is a matter of discussion and contention of “facts,” so get out there and join or start groups, talk to people, spread the dissident word
* living the non-violent life of a civil-disobedient citizen of the world
Posted by bojinka on Mar 29, 2003 at 2:42 PM The news media is not interested in presenting in depth the oppsition to this war. They just offer some very limited pictures indicating that they are protesters. Those of us opposed to this war have alternative proposals to what is really happening. The Media is not measuring up to its responibiites required by a Free Society. You have given a good accounting of the demonstrations in NY and it was/is the same everywhere.
Posted by Mac White on Mar 29, 2003 at 6:11 PM interesting reporting. love reading the readers’ comments.
Posted by gretchen on Mar 29, 2003 at 8:01 PM When I moved to Canada from the UK I was astounded by the number of commercials on TV. However, I was also impressed to find a vibrant tradition of independent broadcasting in the form of community radio. These stations are kept going by yearly funding drives contributed to by a public which obviously values impartiality, not to mention lack of advertising. Meanwhile, digital radio is already making an impact in providing global entertainment.
Sites like inthesetimes.com will soon have the ability to be an inflence in people’s homes and lives in the way that the networks currently are. As people require their news ever more immediately, it seems to me that an independent challenge to the networks can only be made with sufficient investment in journalistic talent. Who knows, maybe people are prepared to pay for the truth?
Posted by MPAGA on Mar 29, 2003 at 9:10 PM The corruption of mainstream media and the poor coverage of the war and the anti-war demonstrations has manipulated the consumer driven and fear pumped American people. Who would think that if we let the most rich and powerful people in the nation to control the way in which we get our information, it would end up with us being their puppets, eating up every lie or censored fact they give us or don’t. This mass manipulation and thought control by the media must end and the only way to do that is to democratize our media system and rid ourselves of the major corporations that bring to us nothing but the propaganda that will make them more money. Independent and public media is the only tool that will ever free us from the vail of this evil.
Posted by Spencer Hickok on Mar 30, 2003 at 9:17 PM Mr. Nixon you sell short the power of television in bringing on the evilution your side so desires. Recall that the image of one girl in one frame (photo) running down a street in Vietnam burned in a NORTH VIETNAMESE attack ended the use of napalm by the United States.
The sheep are always controlled by emotion. Television can well up emotion so well. It is in the course of reading and thinking that the positions of the left disintergrate.
Like for instance your argument that the television is not an effective instrument for the left. What idiocy. What lies.
It is a great tool for the left. If the real nuts (not the sensibly dressed grey haired man) had been interviewed or even shown the poll numbers favoring the President would climb even further.Try again Mr. Nixon, your evilution is being shown, just in properly measured doses to elicit just the right level of action or reaction.
Posted by Carl Snodgrass on Mar 31, 2003 at 11:46 AM Since the 1950’s Americans have been passively brainwashed by television, it is just now that we are noticing it. America and the brainwashing became worse when the number of people watching TV wrestling exceeded the number of individuals reading books. Nothing has changed -just us. Some of us are tired of being manipulated and some of us tried thinking on our own, just not enough of us. And Arturo Zeigler is correct in his evaluation of America and their apathy but doesn’t realize that Americans are powerless to fight corporate owned politicians. America did NOT care that we were selling those gases, weapons, ect. to Saddam when he gassed the Kurds/Iranians because we needed him politically. It is always about $$$$ and power in America. But realize that the few who have the guts to stand up now and protest deserve credit not insults even if it seems like too little too late.
Posted by zee on Mar 31, 2003 at 2:40 PM Also , thank the FCC for the remaining 5 corporate media monoliths and clear channel is one of the worst in radio for forced brainwashing.
Posted by zee on Mar 31, 2003 at 2:45 PM Mr. Nixon,
Great points well made. I was a print and radio journalist before I became a police officer. I have been appalled at the invasion of the news media by conservative interests that want to either spin or mute the truth. Thanks for a true report.
Posted by Shawn Inlow on Mar 31, 2003 at 3:55 PM Zee writes: “Also , thank the FCC for the remaining 5 corporate media monoliths and clear channel is one of the worst in radio for forced brainwashing.”
ZEE, how many corporate media monoliths were there thirty years ago?
There are more news sources today than ever before and fewer people get their news from one of the so called monoliths than ever before.
Posted by Carl Snodgrass on Mar 31, 2003 at 11:25 PM I have been under the impression that media is simply about self promotion. Whatever sell more commercials is their primary interest. Why do so many people expect the truth when it’s profit motivated?
Posted by Jamey R. on Apr 1, 2003 at 12:39 AM Speaking as a print journalist, I know that—at least in my small town—the newspaper is where TV “journalists” get their news.
Posted by Pat Ryan on Apr 2, 2003 at 7:00 PM Mr. Snodgrass,
Please trying thinking first before spewing forth on the media. Yes there are so many more media outlets and stations to watch today than 30 years ago. But just 5 coperate monoliths own all those stations. You are getting the same footage and media coverage even while watching supposedly different T.V. stations.
Posted by Brian Cummings on Apr 3, 2003 at 3:15 AM BRIAN from CA writes:
“Mr. Snodgrass,
Please trying thinking first before spewing forth on the media. Yes there are so many more media outlets and stations to watch today than 30 years ago. But just 5 coperate monoliths own all those stations. You are getting the same footage and media coverage even while watching supposedly different T.V. stations.”Brian, here is my thinking:
1) In the early 70’s we had 3 major broadcast media’s & two principle papers, NY Times and WA Post, from which most reporting took its cue. Addmittedly, even today the lead of the NY Times and WA Post influences reporting. (I discount NPR as it is government owned.)
2) Now we have FOX & CNN, in addition to ABC, NBC, & CBS. Also CBN (Christian), TBN (Trinity) and Daystar provide different perspective as does AL Jezeera and the more accessible BBC. Many foreign papers are also now available in the US.
4) AM radio’s resurgence in the 1990’s is another new source since the early 70’s
5) The Web is likewise: WND.com, DEBKA.com, Drudge.com of the right all provide original reporting. Sites like Inthesetimes.com on the left also provide unique outlets. Of course many others are less well known.
6) In addition Blog sites have added a new (corporate free shall we say) perspective on events.
7) Among weekly and monthlies there were just a few widely circulated magazines in the 70’s. Now, typically, a Junior High school’s periodical department will carry more news magazines with a wider publisher base than what you would find 30 year’s ago at a news stand.
That the more divergent sources of news are having a huge impact can be seen in the recent firing of Peter Arnett. In 1968 Walter Cronkite told America that the TET offensive was a great military success for the Vietcong, yet they were slaughtered in every engagement. But with the pictures of fighting on the US embassy grounds Cronkites words were accepted as truth.
Arnett’s recent words might also have been taken for truth if we today didn’t have more news sources. That we do and that there was a quick email response to his propganda should tell you that the control of news by ‘monoliths’ has markedly decreased rather than increased.Brian, while man tries to centralize his world (e.g. AOL/Time-Warner) to make it neat and tidy, remember this saying of which the left is so fond, ‘the center cannot hold.’
Take care, Carl :-)!
Posted by Carl Snodgrass on Apr 3, 2003 at 9:43 AM Excellent! I was there and couldn’t agree more. The media should be as much a target of protest as the war itself. It’s unbelievably frustrating that people have little access to information that could very well change their minds about the direction the country is going in. I get the same feeling of powerlessness as when November rolls around and there is a slate of candidates that offers no choice.
Posted by Peter Koch on Apr 5, 2003 at 5:15 PM .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Posted by dsmolla@hotmail.com on Apr 8, 2003 at 5:44 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Will Nixon
- Drop Television, Not Bombs
What the TV news couldn’t tell you about the protests
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2003 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
