We Must Be on the Front Page!
This morning I was purusing The Columbian to see what they had to say about our little get together outside the Hilton yesterday afternoon. For some reason I started with the Clark County section, thinking that since our protest was local, it would get local coverage.
What did I find? Nothing. Nothing except an article about Senator Cantwell's call for the Pentagon to resupply the National Guard for their lost equipment in Afghanistan and Iraq (way to put a band-aid on a severed artery, Senator). I skimmed the article to see if there was any mention of the protest. There was none.
Now I started to get a little miffed. I'd seen a reporter and photographer at the protest, I had assumed they were from The Columbian, but I didn't see anything written about the protest. I was beginning to wonder if some of my conspiracy theorist friends were right, and "the powers that be" had kyboshed any mention of dissent.
So I turned to the front page section (reading it first would have been so, like, linear). Well surprise, surprise, surprise! There, on the FRONT PAGE, below the fold, was an article about the Cantwell/Biden affair, with a sub-headline about the protest. All in all I thought the article was pretty good and fair. It did a decent job of juxtaposing the folks outside the Hilton with Senator Cantwell and the folks inside.
I have two quibbles with the article, though. First, it says state Senator Craig Pridemore "defended" Senator Cantwell's vote to go to war. I was standing about 5 feet away from Senator Pridemore when he made these comments, and while the quote is accurate, I believe it mischacterizes the context of his fuller statement, the jist of which was that Senator Cantwell's vote was a mistake and she needed to address that with the folks outside (and inside) the Hilton. I have followed Senator Pridemore since before his state senate campaign and he has always been outspoken in his opposition to the war in Iraq, and his reservations about the Patriot Act. I also think it bore mentioning that Senator Pridemore was there to attend the fundraiser, but took a good 15-20 mintues to stop and talk with several of the protesters (although not me personally... maybe next time Senator).
My second quibble is less about the reporting and more about the emphasis of the protest. It was overwhelmingly an anti-war protest. That's fine and to be expected, and there were a few people with pro-censure signs. Unfortunately, the article did not talk about the censure issue. Anyway, I wish the pro-censure faction had had a larger presence, and that the reporting had taken note of that.
Still, censure is a recent issue, while the Iraq war has been with us for awhile. Hopefully censure will gain both popular and political support, and will be the subject of many more demonstrations and news articles.
Finally, I do recommend the article in full to you. It contains what I think is Senator Biden's roadmap for dealing with the Iraq issue as he campaigns for the 2008 Democratic nomination. But I'll talk more about that later.
What did I find? Nothing. Nothing except an article about Senator Cantwell's call for the Pentagon to resupply the National Guard for their lost equipment in Afghanistan and Iraq (way to put a band-aid on a severed artery, Senator). I skimmed the article to see if there was any mention of the protest. There was none.
Now I started to get a little miffed. I'd seen a reporter and photographer at the protest, I had assumed they were from The Columbian, but I didn't see anything written about the protest. I was beginning to wonder if some of my conspiracy theorist friends were right, and "the powers that be" had kyboshed any mention of dissent.
So I turned to the front page section (reading it first would have been so, like, linear). Well surprise, surprise, surprise! There, on the FRONT PAGE, below the fold, was an article about the Cantwell/Biden affair, with a sub-headline about the protest. All in all I thought the article was pretty good and fair. It did a decent job of juxtaposing the folks outside the Hilton with Senator Cantwell and the folks inside.
I have two quibbles with the article, though. First, it says state Senator Craig Pridemore "defended" Senator Cantwell's vote to go to war. I was standing about 5 feet away from Senator Pridemore when he made these comments, and while the quote is accurate, I believe it mischacterizes the context of his fuller statement, the jist of which was that Senator Cantwell's vote was a mistake and she needed to address that with the folks outside (and inside) the Hilton. I have followed Senator Pridemore since before his state senate campaign and he has always been outspoken in his opposition to the war in Iraq, and his reservations about the Patriot Act. I also think it bore mentioning that Senator Pridemore was there to attend the fundraiser, but took a good 15-20 mintues to stop and talk with several of the protesters (although not me personally... maybe next time Senator).
My second quibble is less about the reporting and more about the emphasis of the protest. It was overwhelmingly an anti-war protest. That's fine and to be expected, and there were a few people with pro-censure signs. Unfortunately, the article did not talk about the censure issue. Anyway, I wish the pro-censure faction had had a larger presence, and that the reporting had taken note of that.
Still, censure is a recent issue, while the Iraq war has been with us for awhile. Hopefully censure will gain both popular and political support, and will be the subject of many more demonstrations and news articles.
Finally, I do recommend the article in full to you. It contains what I think is Senator Biden's roadmap for dealing with the Iraq issue as he campaigns for the 2008 Democratic nomination. But I'll talk more about that later.
posted by Kumar at 9:48 PM
1 Comments:
Senator,
Thanks for stopping by! Wow! I'm very honored to have you as a guest. Please excuse the clutter, but feel free to make yourself at home.
I agree with you about the sentors and representatives (Republican AND Democrat) who voted us into war in Iraq. There needs to be a concerted effort to bring our involvement over there to a close. Such a plan is obviously not being generated by the Administration, so that leaves it to the Congress to do something (actually, at this point I'd say it's been left to the people to do something, and they have been trying).
Thanks again for stopping by. I hope to see you around the activist circle. If I do, I'll say "hello" and ask you how things are coming with abolishing the WASL (another issue I give you high marks on).
Take care.
Kumar
Post a Comment
<< Home