>>The media may have contributed with their press blackouts, but that
>>was true in many past peace movements and the message got out on
>>the streets.
>
>Nonsense. It didn't really get out even during the Vietnam War -- the
>story Bruce Franklin tells of the MIA/POW mythmaking (and the dedication
>of his book) gives a fair idea of how successfully the minimal facts
>about the Vietnam War _never_ got out to a very large population.
>Perhaps the strongest evidence for that is the continued use even today
>as a hugely clever joke the term "peacenik."
After studying the media coverage of the anti-Vietnam War movement, Melvin Small concluded: "From the first major demonstration in April, 1965, to the wild Mayday activities of May, 1971, the media framed their stories in terms of the size and composition of the crowds attending antiwar events, and especially the absence or presence of violent, bizarre, or countercultural behavior. Aside from reporting that the protesters wanted out of Vietnam, the media virtually ignored the political discourse that served as the centerpiece for most antiwar activities. They rarely exposed casual readers and viewers, who constituted the bulk of their audiences, to the rationales behind protest activities" (_Covering Dissent: The Media and the Anti-Vietnam War Movement_, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP, 1994, p. 160). As even the largest anti-war mobilizations only involved a minority of Americans, it makes sense, given the character of media coverage, that "the message" -- beyond No! -- never reached those who only saw them on TV, read about them in newspapers, etc. -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>