Unfair media coverage? Media Continues To Sideline March For Life Coverage

[shockedcanadian]

Posting this from last year because it addressed the unfair coverage. Considering how much coverage this protest today is receiving even here in Canada on CBC, and the calling out of media by the president during and after the election, will this coverage change in 2017 to better reflect reality?

Media Continues To Sideline March For Life Coverage

Compare March Coverage to Other Rallies
According to the Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, 200,000 people turned out for the march last year, but the big three American TV networks (CBS, ABC, and NBC) devoted only 15 seconds to covering the march. In 2014, it was 46 seconds.

Compare this to the nearly 24/7 coverage of protests and looting in Ferguson, Missouri, for weeks on end, where there were surely less than 200,000 people gathered at any one time. The mainstream media are happy to put shoplifters and looters on national television demonstrating for their cause, but won’t do the same for a peaceful group many times the size.

The media’s lack of coverage of the march is problematic in two ways. At its most fundamental level, it is an egregious violation of basic journalistic principles. Any young student of journalism knows that when a crowd gathers and plans to march, it’s a news story. When a crowd of 200,000 gathers with a historic blizzard pending, it’s definitely a story. The basic journalistic drive to “get there” and get the story is a powerful one, and not easily ignored.

 

[bullwinkle]

Posting this from last year because it addressed the unfair coverage. Considering how much coverage this protest today is receiving even here in Canada on CBC, and the calling out of media by the president during and after the election, will this coverage change in 2017 to better reflect reality?

Media Continues To Sideline March For Life Coverage

Compare March Coverage to Other Rallies
According to the Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, 200,000 people turned out for the march last year, but the big three American TV networks (CBS, ABC, and NBC) devoted only 15 seconds to covering the march. In 2014, it was 46 seconds.

Compare this to the nearly 24/7 coverage of protests and looting in Ferguson, Missouri, for weeks on end, where there were surely less than 200,000 people gathered at any one time. The mainstream media are happy to put shoplifters and looters on national television demonstrating for their cause, but won’t do the same for a peaceful group many times the size.

The media’s lack of coverage of the march is problematic in two ways. At its most fundamental level, it is an egregious violation of basic journalistic principles. Any young student of journalism knows that when a crowd gathers and plans to march, it’s a news story. When a crowd of 200,000 gathers with a historic blizzard pending, it’s definitely a story. The basic journalistic drive to “get there” and get the story is a powerful one, and not easily ignored.

Shocked, I'm watching continuous coverage from major cities all over the country, and the world. I had to smile as I saw a sign carried in Buenos Aires that read, "Make America good again!". I am so encouraged. This is my second go-around. This is the 60s all over again...on steroids. The crowds are mind-boggling. My contribution this time around is limited to hassling Reps and letter writing, but I certainly am proud of the resistance to an indifferent retro-regime. Already mortgage protections and violence against women restrictions have been rolled back by Exec Order, and it ain't gonna be easy for Washington any more. I'm hoping this is a beginning. I'm thinking Trump is the catalyst we needed to get fired up. I do not wish him harm, but I do wish him and his plans for America gone from office!

 

[Slave2the$]

Violence against women restrictions rolled back? Can you explain what happened.

 

[EverCurious]

Their march for a good cause has been usurped by far left haters and Soros protestors, while it might swell the ranks, it's not going to get much interest from a lot of American's because we're sick and tired of the hypocritical BS of the left wing. The media, some of them, are wising up to what American's want to watch now. They should have pushed for quality, rather than quantity of numbers. All the pussy hats are being ignored. It's sad for the women's movement, but that's what happens when you let 'wrong headed' ideologies over run your message (tis pretty much what happened to the Democrat party over the past decades.)

 

[BlackFlag]

Posting this from last year because it addressed the unfair coverage. Considering how much coverage this protest today is receiving even here in Canada on CBC, and the calling out of media by the president during and after the election, will this coverage change in 2017 to better reflect reality?

Media Continues To Sideline March For Life Coverage

Compare March Coverage to Other Rallies
According to the Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, 200,000 people turned out for the march last year, but the big three American TV networks (CBS, ABC, and NBC) devoted only 15 seconds to covering the march. In 2014, it was 46 seconds.

Compare this to the nearly 24/7 coverage of protests and looting in Ferguson, Missouri, for weeks on end, where there were surely less than 200,000 people gathered at any one time. The mainstream media are happy to put shoplifters and looters on national television demonstrating for their cause, but won’t do the same for a peaceful group many times the size.

The media’s lack of coverage of the march is problematic in two ways. At its most fundamental level, it is an egregious violation of basic journalistic principles. Any young student of journalism knows that when a crowd gathers and plans to march, it’s a news story. When a crowd of 200,000 gathers with a historic blizzard pending, it’s definitely a story. The basic journalistic drive to “get there” and get the story is a powerful one, and not easily ignored.

The March for Life happens every year and nothing of any note happens at them. People don't care.

This march is one time only and comes the day after a Presidential Inauguration, and is eclipsing the turnout of that inauguration. Exponentially so if you include the protests around the world.

 

[Zorro!]

Posting this from last year because it addressed the unfair coverage. Considering how much coverage this protest today is receiving even here in Canada on CBC, and the calling out of media by the president during and after the election, will this coverage change in 2017 to better reflect reality?

Media Continues To Sideline March For Life Coverage

Compare March Coverage to Other Rallies
According to the Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, 200,000 people turned out for the march last year, but the big three American TV networks (CBS, ABC, and NBC) devoted only 15 seconds to covering the march. In 2014, it was 46 seconds.

Compare this to the nearly 24/7 coverage of protests and looting in Ferguson, Missouri, for weeks on end, where there were surely less than 200,000 people gathered at any one time. The mainstream media are happy to put shoplifters and looters on national television demonstrating for their cause, but won’t do the same for a peaceful group many times the size.

The media’s lack of coverage of the march is problematic in two ways. At its most fundamental level, it is an egregious violation of basic journalistic principles. Any young student of journalism knows that when a crowd gathers and plans to march, it’s a news story. When a crowd of 200,000 gathers with a historic blizzard pending, it’s definitely a story. The basic journalistic drive to “get there” and get the story is a powerful one, and not easily ignored.

Why the pro-Death folks hate Trump:

Trump Will Be the First President to Speak at the March for Life.

"We are deeply honored to welcome President Trump to the 47th annual March for Life. He will be the first president in history to attend and we are so excited for him to experience in person how passionate our marchers are about life and protecting the unborn,"
​

Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life, said in a statement on Wednesday.

"From the appointment of pro-life judges and federal workers, to cutting taxpayer funding for abortions here and abroad, to calling for an end to late-term abortions, President Trump and his Administration have been consistent champions for life and their support for the March for Life has been unwavering. We are grateful for all these pro-life accomplishments and look forward to gaining more victories for life in the future,"​

 

[bullwinkle]

Posting this from last year because it addressed the unfair coverage. Considering how much coverage this protest today is receiving even here in Canada on CBC, and the calling out of media by the president during and after the election, will this coverage change in 2017 to better reflect reality?

Media Continues To Sideline March For Life Coverage

Compare March Coverage to Other Rallies
According to the Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, 200,000 people turned out for the march last year, but the big three American TV networks (CBS, ABC, and NBC) devoted only 15 seconds to covering the march. In 2014, it was 46 seconds.

Compare this to the nearly 24/7 coverage of protests and looting in Ferguson, Missouri, for weeks on end, where there were surely less than 200,000 people gathered at any one time. The mainstream media are happy to put shoplifters and looters on national television demonstrating for their cause, but won’t do the same for a peaceful group many times the size.

The media’s lack of coverage of the march is problematic in two ways. At its most fundamental level, it is an egregious violation of basic journalistic principles. Any young student of journalism knows that when a crowd gathers and plans to march, it’s a news story. When a crowd of 200,000 gathers with a historic blizzard pending, it’s definitely a story. The basic journalistic drive to “get there” and get the story is a powerful one, and not easily ignored.

Why the pro-Death folks hate Trump:

Trump Will Be the First President to Speak at the March for Life.

"We are deeply honored to welcome President Trump to the 47th annual March for Life. He will be the first president in history to attend and we are so excited for him to experience in person how passionate our marchers are about life and protecting the unborn,"
​

Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life, said in a statement on Wednesday.

"From the appointment of pro-life judges and federal workers, to cutting taxpayer funding for abortions here and abroad, to calling for an end to late-term abortions, President Trump and his Administration have been consistent champions for life and their support for the March for Life has been unwavering. We are grateful for all these pro-life accomplishments and look forward to gaining more victories for life in the future,"​

I'd much rather see a march for Quality of Life.