group who planned it? They out numbered the protesters.
2007-03-19 06:56:04 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Look it up for yourself on Fox news.
2007-03-19 07:01:58 · update #1
DC --Fox still reported it, so why didn't anyone else? They were there to..
2007-03-19 07:12:55 · update #2
tonalc---they estimated only 5,000 of those were anti-war protesters.
2007-03-19 07:15:28 · update #3
Because it doesn't go along with their agenda...
Same with everything else...nothing that goes against their liberial bias gets on the news...and when it does...it's minimal coverage.
2007-03-19 06:59:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 2⤋
For the simple reason that a populus in revolt brings higher ratings than one in agreement.
Regrettably, the news media (CNN, FOX, MSNBC etc.) are driven by the good ol' yankee dollar. The higher the ratings, the more $$$ they make on advertisements. So the media has a conflict of interest with the truth when the truth is boring or is good news. Good news does not sell newspapers like bad news does, and no bad news sells better than a scandal or cover-up. Americans love a good conspiracy. It has mystique and drama, and on a culture that was raised in front of the boob-tube, drama is what they want.
So the media will always show you the worst side of anything. They will do it eagerly if it makes the right look bad. They will do it reluctantly if it makes the left look bad. Why is this? Because the right stands for self control and discipline and a set of minimum moral standards. A society that has self control, discipline and moral standards does not produce corruption, violence and horror on the same scale as anarchy does, and so the media supports the left.
They are well known for their famous "don't shoot the messenger" defense, or the ever popular "the people have a right to know." Actually, the messenger is suppose to deliver a message based on the facts only, and not get paid any more or less because the message is good news or bad news. If the messenger starts changing the message in order to get more money, then yes, you do shoot the messenger.
The public does have a right to know. They have the right to now the whole story or none of it at all, not just one side of it .
No, I won't trust a news organization that is run for profit. Nor will I trust an organization that is beholden to a benefactor for its funding (NPR). Instead, I will survey all the available news sources regardless of their motive or affiliation and draw my own conclusions.
2007-03-20 02:05:19 · answer #2 · answered by sparc77 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The media when it comes to politics it is agenda driven.
If we want the left to provide places for us to verify their claims, we must do like wise & as courteous as possible.
The right doesn't want war any more than the Left. The right is less likely to show up to a protest rally, because they don't see that it will promote any cause.
The right's position is: Will pulling out leave the Iraqis in a better position than when we entered, & long term will the US & 1st world be better off.
I'm not certain, but if the Left could focus on offering their solution on how to have the outcome be the Iraqis better off than when we entered & also the 1st world better off the Right would be more willing to listen.
Did the Pease protests of the 60's help or hurt the South Vietnamese. Long term was the US Helped or hurt. Before you answer think. Does the US looking like a paper tiger help or hurt the LONG TERM PEACE MOVEMENT?
Did leaving our Embassy personnel Held captive in IRAN for over 400 Days help the peace in the World? How many embassies were taken over by the US's in action.
It would probably surprise the Left to discover the right many times is more anti war than they are. The right has paid for/owns the production capacity that is being destroyed. Since the right pays most of the taxes they are footing most of the non-human cost of the war.
****Even Dennis Pragger is asking this same question about the lack of protesters in the world on a scheduled day.****
2007-03-19 07:14:35 · answer #3 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Pizzachu: "the assumption of a reasonable protest is hilarious" no longer that hilarious, and not without precedent. In Northern eire, Catholics have protested against the events of the IRA, that's a Catholic terrorist company. regrettably, Muslims do no longer seem to make certain issues in extremely the comparable way.
2016-10-02 09:38:46 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The turn outs were different in different locations. Some places the anti war crowd had a pretty decent turn out and others they got a handful.
For all of you anti war types out there remember that the overall turnout in all the major cities was still less than the million man march in DC.
2007-03-19 07:01:17 · answer #5 · answered by meathookcook 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I wish that ALL those people who are so against thewar would go to Iraq and talk to the people who are causing the trouble. IF it weren't for the ones who keep setting off bombs in market places we wouldn't be there now.
Do they really think they don't like war any more than I do? I'd go protest but I've got a job to do.
2007-03-19 08:33:26 · answer #6 · answered by namsaev 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The mainstream media has turned into creators of news rather than the reporters of it. They make what is NOT a newsworthy story sound like one and only write, uh, "report" what fits in with their political ideology.
2007-03-19 16:01:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hey Tinker...THEY DID..I almost laughed myself silly...it hurt them so much bit CNN did give it a 30 second blip....
thats where I got my numbers for my Q yesterday..here they are for DC
Approximate numbers are ...based on CNN reports
War Protesters...10-15 thousand
Pro-US /Anti-Protesters Rally...30 thousand.plus..
PROOF...the libs do not have the support they claim
2007-03-19 07:23:58 · answer #8 · answered by Try Reality 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I am sorry about it, Hun. But we must realize that all media is Liberal biased, who want an end to the war, and want America to lay down, act cowardly, and pander to the terrorist. I imagine it's because they're afraid to fight, even to save their children's lives. They want America to change. No longer, if they ever did, think freedom should be fought for. Remember George Bush's words after 9/11? He said "Freedom will be defended." Liberals don't want that, they want Socialism, control of the people, controlled, ruled, delegated to, and taken care of. In their eyes, freedom and righteousness doesn't belong in a humans brain.
Thank God for Fox News, who won't let the American ideals, which our forefather's set down for our behalf, die. Republicans, and Conservatives stay strong! There is right and wrong. We're right, and the Left is, well you know!
2007-03-19 07:19:44 · answer #9 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
If what you say is true (and Fox news is about as far from being an unbiased news agency as Pravda was in the sixties) then I guess it's 'cause the liberals had to be at work, and all the conservatives had to do was find one of their numbers sober enough to drive the '68 Ford pick-up down to the welfare line and load them up.
2007-03-19 07:39:10 · answer #10 · answered by Charlie S 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋
ANTI WAR DOES NOT EQUAL ANTI TROOPS. And who cares, it's just a freaking protest. You're acting like these are the people fighting the actual war. That is where your concerns should lie.
2007-03-19 07:04:28 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋