|
nmazca.com
|
|
Tonight, of course, brought news of the massive rallies held in opposition to the US-led initiative to disarm Iraq by force. VOICES OF DISSENT (with dissent in red letters) was the block-letter title and graphic for the portion of CNN Saturday that I watched. Host was Carol Lin, who repeatedly put forth the question: "Thousands (their reports would later mention millions) march worldwide against war... but will it really make any difference? (Inflection hers). The coverage went from Manhattan (100,000 in streets, 100 protestors arrested, "8 policemen, 2 horses injured") with accompanying footage from Pittsburgh and Raleigh, and mention of "similar protests" in Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle and Miami. San Franciscans put off their march to allow a Chinese New Year parade. I guess that explains why the only other people on the bus south of the Space Needle (the staging area for the march) were Chinese... Seattle, I'll point out, was mobbed up. I left before 11 to get downtown for a shoot at noon. Southbound buses were beyond capacity and not taking more passengers for the whole hour. I worked my way east across town, trying three different buslines. In Wallingford, people who couldn't get on buses ended up flagging down drivers in transit. If the march started at noon (unlikely), it was still in progress at 3:30, with a four-lane wide, four-block long mass of folks still visible to my right as I made my way to another shoot. Scores of thousands, at the least. Anyhow, the dissent coverage: the focus shifted to Australia, where a gargantuan rally was underway -- "the largest the country has ever seen." Then it was off to Europe, with split-screen video from Madrid, London, Paris, Berlin and Rome. The German event received the most attention (since it and France have proved to be such thorns in the federal gov't's side). The commentator brought on to remark on the European situation (France and Germany now refuse to endorse any war; along with Belgium they won't add forces in Turkey) was a generic retired general, whom host Lin warmly welcomed as if they'd just seen each other at the show or a social --- which is likely. The General said that while it was certainly better for America to move forward with allies rather than without them, and while America always tries to cooperate with and accomodate its allies, it would move ahead with the plan that's been laid out by the administration. He was straightforward and tactful; Lin was the one who began to sway back and forth, rolling her neck, spouting about "You know, the U.S. puts twice as much into NATO than all the other members, so why don't we just say, 'You know what, we don't need you.'? This is supposed to be an alliance, and if they're not going to support the alliance, then why don't we just move ahead without them?" As the segment ended, The General went on to say "In that footage that you just showed, a lot of those countries couldn't have had rallies like that a few years ago without the help that they got from the United States to effect regime change (with the exception of Berlin, which was partly controlled by the Soviets, "What the hell?!") It's worthwhile to want peace, but sometimes as a last resort, to restore or secure peace, we have to use force." Carol in the backround: "Yep... that's right." And if the stakes and the fear and the clinging on to institutions and seeking to please (alleged) audience weren't what they are, this on-air editorializing would've astounded me. Instead, it only showed the hollowness and pandering that has warped television [news] into its own peculiar institution: theft of attention and bereft of intelligence. The Fourth Estate, indeed. Next up, the questions: "The anti-war movement seems to have reached critical mass, even before the war has begun. But will anyone listen? Will this make any difference to Bush?" Lin read that there had been a WH statement that declared El Presidente's remaining "hopes for a peaceful resoluton to the conflict." And then they wheeled out a "presidential historian," Douglas Brinkley, to discuss the impact all these protests could have... especially since there were so many "normal people" who took to the streets -- "soccer moms, bankers, families with children... the middle-class" -- not the typical leftists, actors and radical poets. Protestologist Brinkley said that if it was just the latter group, then their protests could be ignored by the administration, they don't take it seriously. However, it's when the soccer moms, the middle-class people, the Gulf War veterans who claim to have been sickened during that campaign (and who have gone public) -- if they rally, then the WH would pay attention. However, he noted, all this protest is going on before there's any fighting, and if that begins then "Americans will fall in behind the flag." And here the phrasing got funny, because they kept saying "IF they take part, IF their numbers grow..." when it had already had been noted (and it's been the trend through the last several months of action) that they HAVE. The banter took this shift to make it seem that, well, if MORE of these people join the anti-war movement (which is the largest effort undertaken in this or any other nation BEFORE combat), then there MIGHT be some more consideration paid to them. Short of that, the movement needs to have a charismatic (male) leader... someone who could shake things up for the Bush junta, like if Colin Powell broke away. Curious. Snide. The spin was in. The segment ended, with another approving smile from Carol. Lin switched tone: "Terror Alert! Go get that duct tape! (in wink-wink, sing-song voice)" She led in to the next segment about the fear and confusion that had set in after the terrorism color strip was moved to orange... and there was a smile in her voice. "The nation is in a panic and supplies are flying off the shelves. We'll bring in two radio talk show hosts to discuss the threat of terror when we come back!" Now I was a bit astounded and went to look for edible food. What followed was two guys getting into a Left-Right, Punch and Judy pantomime ("I don't think Bush knows much about anything!" "That despicable liberal Hillary Clinton..." "Excuse me, I don't need to be interrupted by you!" Groan) about the efficacy of Apple Pie and Smilesland Security, the color code, what the people should be told and when, and blah blah blah. They started shouting and I began to read a magazine. Then I had some food. But not before I got hit by this garish promo for the next show: "HIGH TECH AL QAEDA" "They're on the move, they're regrouping, see how Osama bin Laden's forces escaped from Afghanistan, find out what new technologies they could use and how they're plotting their next attacks" all narrated above panning, diagonally twisted shots of computer screens, web browsers, color-manipulated old footage of Osama walking among soldiers, pointing at things and turning his head over his shoulder... all of this color-keyed to -- that's right -- the color orange. I haven't heard one peep about this man (except those purported tapes -- the one from the fall the FBI determined was a fake), but now, to up the anxiety level, he's shown walking around and plotting to git yo mama. Where is the frightening expose into the federal government's 50-year-long global campaign of intimidation, exploitation and coercion? Who will speak to the causes of and connections between violent, vengeful terrorism and the knowing and willful machinations and violence undertaken by this nation's government? Who will break through the parroted, pandering, simplistic and dualistic story and steer the dialogue toward acknowledgement and constructive (though difficult) conversation? It will have to be us... because after "High Tech Al Qaeda," Larry King's gonna interview Priscila Presley. |