Is it easier for the media to cover conservative protests than liberal protests?

[ck4829]

When liberals protest, you have thousands of people, not saying that the US is bad or that we're all evil, but these protesters urge viewers to look at the history of what our government has done and look at what twisted things our tax dollars have done to other countries. And you're lucky if these are even given a quarter of a page mention in the back of a newspaper.

When conservatives protest, you can have as few as three people, wearing flags as clothing or powdered wings, screaming "SOCIALISM! SOCIALISM! SOCIALISM!" over and over again. This receives front page newspaper coverage and in 24 hour news stations, it gets 23.

The 'liberal' media revels in simplicity, so is it any coincidence that conservative protests are covered much more by the media?

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Not at all -- it's a "Man Bites Dog" story

Our media have become so obsessed with cultural reference and irony that they will seize in ANY opportunity to invert common perceptions and compare non-equivalencies.

The Right does this, too; most of its "gotcha" politics is directed at finding liberals/Democrats who have illegally/immorally done what the Right traditionally illegally/immorally does.

--d!

[nc4bo]

2. It isn't a matter of ease, it's much more sinister than that.

The neocons/RW'ers own and control the media. The left has no counter especially on the major networks.

Why? It certainly can't be due to a lack of funding.

[elehhhhna]

6. YEP! They arrange 'em.

[KharmaTrain]

3. The Anti-War Protestors Didn't Own A Teevee Network...

Remember, the Teabaggers began with a rant on CNBC and then Faux picked it up and ran with it. Imagine if a network had done the same for the anti-war protests in 2003...but peace is a money loser for a country hellbent on profit and power.

There's also been a problem with some "liberal" protests with a lack of focus. Yes, we see it on the teabagger side (many times with comedic effect), but I saw many rallies that were loosely organized with little to no PR apparateus other than fliers and websites. A far cry from the very well planned protests of the late 60s and early 70s. But grassroots tend not to get much coverage by an establishment that lives in a "top-down" world.

Cheers...

[Cirque du So-What]

4. I don't buy that argument

The media love a spectacle, and our protests are always larger & more interesting than theirs. No, it's not ease of coverage that leads the corporate media to pay far more attention to aggrieved conservatroids; it's orders from headquarters to minimize the democratic & magnify the fascistic.

[Lost4words]

5. Spot On CdSW! When you own the media you also control the media.

and since Fairness in Broadcasting was killed by Reagan and Not restored by Clinton, the media has ZERO responsability to report the truth. Its no longer information its INFOTainment!

[Mist]

7. I'm of the opinion that the teabaggers are astro-turf, and made precisely to order

BY the M$M.

[laughingliberal]

8. +1

Exactly. It has nothing to do with the ease of coverage. It has everything to do with an agenda.