What we should realize about the recent unlimited teabag access to the media

[Lerkfish]

anemic tea, at best, whacko, pointless, deranged, dangerous, racist, disturbing tea.

yet, even though it was obvious the teabaggers were fringe nutjobs at best, and even some reporters said as much, they STILL HAD TO COVER them, while they could safely ignore millions of protestors of a liberal side at countless events.

what we should realize is that the media is beyond owned. It is beyond complicit, it is, in fact, a branch office.

[loveandlight]

1. made me sick to watch

Yes! I could barely control my anger at seeing how much coverage they got, and not just on Faux news. I was screaming at the tv set, why didn't you cover the hundreds of thousands of us who were protesting for the past eight years?? But of course, as you describe, that is why.

[uppityperson]

2. Indeed. Damn that librul media!

[Uncle Joe]

3. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Lerkfish.:thumbsup:

[horseshoecrab]

4. yep - k&r

Thanks Lerkfish.

It is exactly as you say.


horseshoecrab

:kick:

[Bigmack]

5. Another thing...

We were protesting war and death and freedom. For all their bullshit rhetoric, they are just protesting money. They want more!

While I disagree totally with the anti-abortion nuts, they are at least protesting something they see as life and death.

The scum/tea baggers are only concerned with the bottom line.

[Raster]

6. Mainstream American Media = Collaborators and Accomplices

[Nostalgic]

7. Well said.

Meanwhile over at Fox, even before tea bag day, pundits were complaining that the other media outlets would only give scant coverage, to reinforce their viewers' inaccurate perception of a "liberal" media. Neil Cavuto made those stupid references to the Million Man March and said that they had to cover the event even though they (Fox) disagreed with them. Turns out Fox wasn't around yet when the Million Man March occurred, but I think Cavuto's hidden agenda there was to dare the other media outlets to cover the Tea Parties, and to give the false impression again that the other media is liberally slanted.

[truedelphi]

8. This was one of my first reactions too. How is that several milllion people out in the

Streets to protest Bush's war got scant coverage on any of the M$M?

Yet these stupid protests were so well covered.

[conscious evolution]

9. Great observation

Hopefully others caught on,also.

[nashville_brook]

10. excellent observation.

...and, nice to see you LF.

[gratuitous]

11. True fact

And, where the tea-bagger protests were hopelessly muddled and incoherent, the popular media helpfully streamlined all messages, and ignored any extraneous material. Whereas, for the millions marching in the streets against the Bush administration invasions, from what coverage was afforded by the media, a casual observer would have been forgiven for thinking, at various times, that they were watching footage of a PETA demonstration. Or an ANSWER rally. Or a bunch of fringe kooks, including our ubiquitous friend in the rainbow fright wig. The reason all these dirty fucking hippies were in the streets was just so darned complicated!

[glitch]

12. This reminds me of something I witnessed.

After the supreme court stole the election for bush in 2000 a group of about 50-75 people spontaneously gathered at the steps of the Seattle Court Building. All sorts of people, young, old, kids.
Someone brought one of those radio shack microphones. People got up and spoke their outrage, pretty much whenever the mic was empty and they felt moved to speak.
A NWCTV channel 3 van arrived and the people in it put up their antennae then sat there at the curb for quite awhile. Then a self-identified communist party speaker arrived, went up and spoke. The "reporters" in the channel 3 truck got out and filmed him. He left right after he spoke, and so did the channel 3 truck.

Hours of speakers, from every age and background, but they waited for the "communist" to arrive before filming, filmed only him and left at the same time he did.