Bush and the Republican party have oft been criticized by the right wing punditocracy for their "inaction" on immigration. In truth, they have pursued a clear and obvious policy. They have shepherded and accelerated a bipartisan policy of hemispheric economic integration that shortchanges workers everywhere ( leading to low wages and immigration) and favors corporations ( high profits for elites).
Failing to address this and rallying ill informed hate is the purview of talk radio. Here, showing sympathy to victims of this economic dislocation is treason. The notion that US workers should show solidarity with other American workers and get together to fix the system is suppressed by the perpetual outrage that some illegals commit crimes (shock!!!). Treating this issue as cheaply and sensationally as any other is a sure fire way to advance in the realm of White Male Angst Radio .
While they are hardly guilt free in this, at least opponents of NAFTA and CAFTA have a home in the Democratic party. At least a wing exists that seeks to prioritize working families over unearned income generation.
This is the message that Ron Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel want to send. In a political race where large corporations effectively select the candidates and disseminate tabloid like propaganda to local outrage radio like WMAR 1420, this is difficult to achieve.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Monday, August 6, 2007
Pittman vs Unger
In an off-election year nationally, now that the folly of the Iraq war has been ascertained, gay marriage resolved and immigration exhausted, south coast pundit watchers and armchair wags can bask in the clash of two local media figures.
For my own part, I think the gulf in quality between print and broadcast media has long been apparent. This gap is amplified on the southcoast where an autonomous, professional, news product generator like the Standard Times can be compared with the local broadcaster whose afternoon commentary exhibits no apparent standards, etiquette or discipline in the manufacture of little more than hot air.
For now, one example will suffice: In his latest entry on his website* Ken Pittman attempts to paint Bob Unger as, of all things, "a leftist". Bob's biases are apparently clear because, in one example, his paper labeled an anti immigration protester "a heckler" and labeled anti marriage amendment folks as "counter demonstrators." **
However, a closer look at two disparate events and two very different types of protester reveals the descriptions are accurate, or at the very least not manufactured of malice and bias. The anti marriage rally was held in public, near City Hall, with police yawning, college kids snapping photos, each side bringing their dogs along for the outing and each side sticking to their side of a street with little malice shown as groups stood a disciplined 8 feet apart.
When immigrant advocates assembled indoors at NBVT HS the sole protestor ( apart from a local KKK type group) repeatedly and specifically yelled at each speaker until she was asked to leave the building by organizers and NBPD - (TV coverage later showed her, sign in hand, chest to chest with NBPD officers, screaming "Where's ICE" in response to their hands-raised request for her to calm down!!!!)***. The Standard times printed her concerns, her status as a Navy Vet, and her pointed criticisms of the Standard Times itself.
While your position on each of the two hot button issues will mean you lend sympathy to one protest over the other, the differences are apparent. Indeed, Pittman's outrage is curious indeed, as he has previously:
+ Expressed indignation when Columbia students ran onstage to disrupt a Minuteman/Jim Gilchrist event.
+ Curiously never asked Gilchirst on air why one of his "security" kicked an off stage student in the temple.
+ Had warned that any "counter protesters" would face arrest at his own anti -immigrant rally****
+ Extensively and fawningly interviewed Ms. Blaha and gay marriage foe Larry Cirignano ( Cirignano himself accused of assaulting a woman at a rally).
Indeed, if there are biases here that warp coverage, it is pretty clear on which media organ this occurs.
__________________________________
*This latest "column" has been heavily edited since the first version was uploaded Sunday. Most interesting is the completely revised description of Pittman's conversation with Unger outside NECN studios.
**In each case however, it is worth noting that complete coverage of both events allowed any reader to make up his or her own mind (google it). Is this the case with WBSM coverage??
*** One wonders what law and order "conservatives" think of such behavior.
**** This WALL rally received extensive before and after coverage by Unger's STimes.
For my own part, I think the gulf in quality between print and broadcast media has long been apparent. This gap is amplified on the southcoast where an autonomous, professional, news product generator like the Standard Times can be compared with the local broadcaster whose afternoon commentary exhibits no apparent standards, etiquette or discipline in the manufacture of little more than hot air.
For now, one example will suffice: In his latest entry on his website* Ken Pittman attempts to paint Bob Unger as, of all things, "a leftist". Bob's biases are apparently clear because, in one example, his paper labeled an anti immigration protester "a heckler" and labeled anti marriage amendment folks as "counter demonstrators." **
However, a closer look at two disparate events and two very different types of protester reveals the descriptions are accurate, or at the very least not manufactured of malice and bias. The anti marriage rally was held in public, near City Hall, with police yawning, college kids snapping photos, each side bringing their dogs along for the outing and each side sticking to their side of a street with little malice shown as groups stood a disciplined 8 feet apart.
When immigrant advocates assembled indoors at NBVT HS the sole protestor ( apart from a local KKK type group) repeatedly and specifically yelled at each speaker until she was asked to leave the building by organizers and NBPD - (TV coverage later showed her, sign in hand, chest to chest with NBPD officers, screaming "Where's ICE" in response to their hands-raised request for her to calm down!!!!)***. The Standard times printed her concerns, her status as a Navy Vet, and her pointed criticisms of the Standard Times itself.
While your position on each of the two hot button issues will mean you lend sympathy to one protest over the other, the differences are apparent. Indeed, Pittman's outrage is curious indeed, as he has previously:
+ Expressed indignation when Columbia students ran onstage to disrupt a Minuteman/Jim Gilchrist event.
+ Curiously never asked Gilchirst on air why one of his "security" kicked an off stage student in the temple.
+ Had warned that any "counter protesters" would face arrest at his own anti -immigrant rally****
+ Extensively and fawningly interviewed Ms. Blaha and gay marriage foe Larry Cirignano ( Cirignano himself accused of assaulting a woman at a rally).
Indeed, if there are biases here that warp coverage, it is pretty clear on which media organ this occurs.
__________________________________
*This latest "column" has been heavily edited since the first version was uploaded Sunday. Most interesting is the completely revised description of Pittman's conversation with Unger outside NECN studios.
**In each case however, it is worth noting that complete coverage of both events allowed any reader to make up his or her own mind (google it). Is this the case with WBSM coverage??
*** One wonders what law and order "conservatives" think of such behavior.
**** This WALL rally received extensive before and after coverage by Unger's STimes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
