Cable News Devotes 30 Seconds to Mass Arrests Protesting Political Corruption
MEDIA, 18 Apr 2016
Lee Fang and Zaid Jilani – The Intercept
Democracy Spring protesters calling for the end of big money in politics stage a sit-in on the Capitol steps and on the East Plaza of the Capitol on April 11, 2016.
12 Apr 2016 – The Democracy Spring, a protest movement calling on Congress to “end the corruption of big money in our politics” and “ensure free and fair elections,” converged on Capitol Hill on Monday [11 Apr], staging a nonviolent sit-in that resulted in over 400 arrests — a massive number by Washington sit-in standards.
While the action, dubbed #DemocracySpring, garnered wide coverage on social media and over 136,000 tweets, cable news programs found little time to cover the political protests, instead focusing largely on horse-race coverage of the presidential candidates for most of the day.
During daytime and afternoon news segments, CNN did not devote any coverage to the actions. MSNBC mentioned the protests for approximately 12 seconds, while Fox News mentioned the arrests and discussed the protests for about 17 seconds.
httpv://vimeo.com/162466142
MSNBC and Fox News not only provided minimal coverage, but hosts on both networks misrepresented the protests, claiming they were narrowly focused only on “voting rights issues.” The focus on systemic political corruption, an issue that was widely criticized during the rally yesterday, was ignored.
Later in the day, CNN posted a short item on its website. The protests were widely covered by CSPAN, Al Jazeera, and NPR, among other outlets. But cable news programs, which specialize in American political news, were another story.
httpv://vimeo.com/162466111
Compare the paltry coverage to a lengthy CNN segment last May, when host Wolf Blitzer featured a correspondent reporting from the scene of a fringe anti-Muslim rally in Phoenix. Left-wing protests in particular have often been ignored by mainstream media coverage.
The parent companies of cable news networks are closely tied to the Washington establishment being challenged by protesters on Monday, both spending and receiving some of the big money the protesters are complaining about.
Comcast, parent company of MSNBC, is among the biggest spenders on political lobbying, and its senior management has raised thousands of campaign dollars for congressional Republicans and Hillary Clinton. Other broadcasting companies have lobbied in recent years against reforms that would diminish the role of big money in election campaigns largely because the bulk of campaign funds are spent on television advertisements, a major source of revenue for television programs. Elizabeth Wilner, senior vice president at Kantar, a media analysis firm, estimated that $4.4 billion would be spent on television ads during the election cycle this year.
Network executives have hardly been shy about celebrating the cash windfall, most notably CBS chief Les Moonves.
Before the demonstrators were arrested, the protesters discussed lack of media coverage for their cause and chanted: “Where is CNN?”
________________________________________
Lee Fang – ✉lee.fang@theintercept.com
Zaid Jilani – ✉zaid.jilani@theintercept.com
Go to Original – theintercept.com
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.