In nearby Sacramento, 20,000 gathered, as did people in 600 other cities on the U.S., in the “Women’s March.” Yet, this morning, there’s a blanket of silence about the aggregate turnout, including the remarkable International sympathy marches. THIS is the media that—using the same tactics of ignoring facts and writing “personality pieces” and quoting unsubstantiated, unanalyzed “polling data”—so poorly told us few facts about national candidates, and misled the public before the elections.
Where have YOU seen published numbers of attendance at the 600 U.S. cities, unique ideas and issues that were shared by the leaders, or interviews with on-the-street participants? Where have you read “on the street” reports of the commonality of messages passed among citizens at those rallies?
I believe, had this been a “Men’s March” in six cities, it would have been headline material in every medium this morning. Rather, what I saw last night was CNN screeching that it wasn’t really a “women’s march,” because it focused on a woman’s “right to choose,” and those who would continue to demand control of women’s reproduction were invited to not participate. (CNN, as usual, was wrong; I saw plenty of signs and people promoting their religious beliefs; no one was excluded where I marched. They weren’t surrounded by supporters, but they were there. They were ignored, but no one tried to evict them).
Our print and electronic media, focused as they are on “capturing eyeballs” to sell advertising, no longer has any incentive to provide a neutral viewpoint based on evident facts, but to focus on reporting mass deaths, undercutting honorable public figures, and feeding “fake news” to the gullible subset of all adults.
How many people gathered in your city, yesterday. From how far away had they come?