Re: Gasp! For broadcast media, patriotism pays

[RadioTony@aol.com]

I would disagree slightly. Have the protesters been covered? Yes, much better and more thorough than 1991 [!] but that is also because the protests were much more impressive this time, both before and after the invasion. 

But my point isn't about how the peace movement or protesters are covered by the news or talk radio, it is about how the debate is structured on news and talk radio. How come historians aren't being invited to discuss the war plans or updates, but we get a million out-of-work generals blathering on about the battle plans? After Afghanistan was attacked, following Sept. 11, Howard Zinn was actually on MSNBC talking about different strategies the government could take to get the Al Quaida. It was the first time I have ever seen him on television and never since. Which is too bad since he had a lot of valid things to say. 

In a message dated 3/29/2003 9:16:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, steveord@bit-net.com writes:

> 
> 
>  Sean Smyth wrote:
> 
> >I agree that anti-war views should be permitted more than they are in the
> >mainstream media,
> 
> Actually, it seems the opposite to me...they seem to get coverage far out 
> of proportion than the relatively miniscule number of participants would 
> normally warrant.
>