Protestors and the media

I'm not really sure why the media in Canada does such a poor job at covering protests, specifically when they are against the war. My favorite lynchpin of decent journalism failed me yesturday. Thestar.com wrote,

“It’s a war based on lies,” said McLucas, 57. “We are gaining strength. The war is becoming more and more unpopular.”

Protests were also held in Canada, Australia, Asia and Europe.

In Toronto, some 1,000 protestors assembled in front of a downtown courthouse across from the U.S. Consulate for a rally.

The demonstrators didn’t limit their message to the Iraq conflict — also waving blood-splattered placards calling on Canada to withdraw its 2,200 troops from Afghanistan.

In Ottawa, about 80 demonstrators, mostly young people, gathered two blocks from Parliament Hill and later at the National Gallery to protest the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

newsflash: thestar.com changed it to this:

In Ottawa, dozens of demonstrators gathered two blocks from Parliament Hill and later at the National Gallery to protest the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

*dozens?!>?

I have been let down in a few ways, which I will detail quickly because I also have two essays due on monday and I should work on them.

This is bad media because:
-the only time the article featured what a protestor was saying was when a 57 year old woman said it. I consider this to be blatant ageism. At the protest I attended, there was a cross-section of society in attendance, but I noticed those who were solicited by media types were hardly the chums I knew helped organize the event.

-the numbers anomaly. So I was at the protest in Ottawa, and thestar.com reported 80 protesters participating. That might have been when we occupied the intersection, handed out food, and chanted and danced around. When we had congregated at the art gallery and marched around the market, there was a heck of a lot more people than 80. No, I didn't count, but I am so sure of this; the crowd since lunch had swelled well beyond the50 or 6o or so student folks that I knew were involved somehow.

And if Ottawa's what, 150-200 people got reduced to 80, then Toronto's own 1000 people accounted for by thestar.com must have been larger. I remember those protests, and I remember every night arriving home and finding online a story about the protests, and the story would always lessen the number of people there. I knew this at the time because organizers had lists of people who they knew were there, as well as those who showed up unaccounted for, and they said they had about 3000 people there.

-I also take issue with the way protestors messages are reduced to a single monolithic statement in the media. Thestar.com specifically says, "and demonstrators message", in the singular, despite the variety of signs, groups, pins, and people who would suggest otherwise. I chatted with a few people and found there was quite a range of views, some completely against troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, some thinking they shouldnt have gone about things the way they did, and Canada's involvement ought to be one of peacekeeping. But to reduce a reduced crowd to one monolithic message, I simply must ask why?

How do these reductions please the media? Why is it imperative to turn these protests into singular sound bytes? I saw cbc-personnell at our protest, and noticed that they were just catching those 4 second shots of the most extremist signs; they did not record what any of our speakers were talking about, they plainly got the gist of it, underestimated the crowds, and went home.

What I take pleasure in knowing, is that despite whosever effort to reduce these protests in meaning significantly, those there know quite well the picture otherwise.