quote: Hey, Rush we come from a super mega dittos household. When my 13-year-old was born she said ditto before she could say mom.
Followed by Rush's assessment:
quote: RUSH: You have, trust me on this. You are far more a voice, a representative voice of the people of this country than any of the rabble rousing malcontents that are being given airtime in a failed attempt to destroy the policy by the mainstream press. Trust me.
*laugh*
The problem here is that this mother is not inherently any more "representative" than Sheehan; it's just that to someone who shares her opinion, her opinion is unsurprisingly more attractive. I'd wager that most people in the Army weren't quite as eager to rush into action as her son; I'd wager, too, that most mothers of enlisted men don't feel that their family has been dishonored by another mother's grief and criticism of the administration.
She's no more the "voice of America" than Sheehan is, or than Rush Limbaugh himself is. What's sobering, if you must come up with a "Voice of America," is to give some thought to the issue of who the "Voice of America" actually is, and how horrifying most of the likely candidates are.
posted
My question is why is she having to call Rush Limbagh (sp?) to have her opinion on the War broadcast? Why aren't ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, Etc. interviewing people like her every time the say anything about Sheehan?
Or is it that Sheehan's story touches a nerve with the broadcasters while they dismiss any Pro-War Activist Mothers whose sons have died?
It's sad really that because she's AntiWar and camping out in front of the Bush Ranch that the media believes she should be heard and makes every attempt to give her as much airtime as she needs.
Is it news or is it Pundit Broadcasting?
And should we listen to Sheehan any more than we should any other Pro-War Activist Mother who has lost a son? If so, why? If not then why are the other mother's not on the news?
EDIT: And I'd like to say that I have NO problem with what she is doing. She has a right to do whatever she wants and believe whatever she wants with regards to the war. I happen to believe her son died trying to give rights and protect the rights of a foreign people so that someday the mothers of the Middle East will be able to do exactly what she is doing without being stoned to death, thrown in prison, or worse.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: My question is why is she having to call Rush Limbagh (sp?) to have her opinion on the War broadcast? Why aren't ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, Etc. interviewing people like her every time the say anything about Sheehan?
Probably the same reason no one has called me to ask me my opinion on the Spice Girls.
quote: And should we listen to Sheehan any more than we should any other Pro-War Activist Mother who has lost a son? If so, why? If not then why are the other mother's not on the news?
In all seriousness, do you believe that it should be the role of the media to decide for us whether or not we should listen to someone? And that the media has for the most part done a good job, historically, of making sure that the opinions most relevant to a successful and informed electorate are the ones being communicated to the masses?
You clearly have your own opinion on the issue. You have formed it despite having been exposed to Sheehan's contrary opinion. I submit that this is not uncommon.
The problem the news media has, of course, is that they have to seem "balanced" -- so it becomes necessary to, by the ridiculous definition of "balance" we use nowadays, throw up a contrary opinion every time an opinion is voiced, just for counterpoint; every argument needs an equal and opposite argument. But some news doesn't have an equivalent. If Sheehan is standing outside Bush's vacation ranch protesting, there is no equivalent protest outside his ranch arguing that he should not talk to her again. So the news media will generally report the event -- in this case, the protest -- and then cite someone who doesn't share her opinion. That someone, because they aren't actually doing anything beyond having an opposing opinion, will often sound weaker.
This is actually a known and observed phenomenon, which is why it's always better to be making news than trying to oppose news.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Probably the same reason no one has called me to ask me my opinion on the Spice Girls.
So you are saying her opinion of the War is invalid and not worthy of National Airtime and Sheehan's is because...? (Hint: Maybe because her son isn't dead? But what of those who have died and are Pro-War, Pro-Mission?)
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:But some news doesn't have an equivalent. If Sheehan is standing outside Bush's vacation ranch protesting, there is no equivalent protest outside his ranch arguing that he should not talk to her again.
So it has to be outside his ranch to be valid? Funny, I see counterpoint discussions on TV all the time where one side is actually not even in the same state or even the same country, but they battle opinions.
Making a claim that since she's out in front of his ranch and there isn't (to your knowledge) a Pro-War advocate out there in the exact same spot opposing her, I'm sorry is very weak. It's like saying there isn't a person named Sheehan that looks exactly like her standing there saying exactly the opposite.
quote:So the news media will generally report the event -- in this case, the protest -- and then cite someone who doesn't share her opinion.
Can you show me reports where they have done a counterpoint?
quote:That someone, because they aren't actually doing anything beyond having an opposing opinion, will often sound weaker.
Again, I'm not aware of a single attempt by the media to portay an opposing equal view in this.
The media has decided to create the icon of her. In fac she's STILL making news although it isn't newsworthy except from a pundit point of view.
Perhaps you can show me the balancing the Major news outlets have done regarding this story.
quote: Making a claim that since she's out in front of his ranch and there isn't (to your knowledge) a Pro-War advocate out there in the exact same spot opposing her, I'm sorry is very weak.
How many pro-war protests do you think are being led right now by mothers of dead soldiers? Besides, you're missing the point; for this particular news story, Sheehan herself is making the news -- whereas anyone else would merely be rebutting her point. This is why, as I said earlier, it's always better to be the one making the news. (Note: the Bush Adminstration understands this instinctively.)
quote: Again, I'm not aware of a single attempt by the media to portay an opposing equal view in this.
You had said earlier that you exclusively watched Fox News. And I know Fox News makes a point of belittling Sheehan whenever possible. So is Fox not part of the media, or are you just saying that you're not aware of other media attempts at "balance" because you don't actually watch other media?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
She doesn't hafta call up Rush at all. Campin' out at Crawford and protestin' that Dubya ain't killin' enough Americans 'll get Debbie in the news fer shur.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:You had said earlier that you exclusively watched Fox News. And I know Fox News makes a point of belittling Sheehan whenever possible. So is Fox not part of the media, or are you just saying that you're not aware of other media attempts at "balance" because you don't actually watch other media?
Uh...I don't even have cable TV. All I got is ABC, NBC and CBS. Perhaps it was someone else...?
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
*runs away screaming*
