Washington Post: Soldier's Mother Takes Protest to Bloggers

[Generic Other]

Soldier's Mother Takes Protest to Bloggers

By Brian Faler

Thursday, August 11, 2005; Page A08

Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq who has been camped outside President Bush's ranch near Crawford, Tex., took her antiwar protest to the Internet yesterday, joining a conference call with bloggers around the country, along with a stray congresswoman.

Sheehan, who has been demanding an audience with the president, told the bloggers that she has felt intimidated by the Secret Service, has been awakened in the middle of the night by thunderstorms and has a sore throat. But, Sheehan said, she has no plans to end her vigil until Bush meets with her to discuss the war, he goes back to the White House or she is arrested


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081001929.html

[txindy]

1. "...along with a stray congresswoman." Sounds bad, so far.

And, sure enough, not exactly a positive, supportive tone in the rest of the article, either.

What. A. Shock. :eyes:

Thanks for bringing this to our attention! :hi: I guess we can't depend on the WP for actual reporting on this issue.

[Erika]

2. It sounds great

She's getting the message out there and she can support and articulate the message.

[txindy]

4. You misunderstand me

I think the congresswoman is great. What's NOT great is the disparaging words of the Post. Or do you think "stray congresswoman" is a compliment? He couldn't even bother naming her. Nearly every chance he had to put in a negative adjective, he took.

Adding: He couldn't bother naming her until AFTER he called her a "stray."

[Erika]

6. Up until today no one other than us has stuck up for her

She's getting the attention now and she can quite capably stand up for herself.

[txindy]

10. What are you talking about?

Google Cindy's name. She's been all over the news, including overseas. People who live in small towns in the heartland who rely on the SCLM for news know who she is. There have been threads here on just that. We're a big support system, yes, but we're far from the only ones. When People magazine hits the stands with Cindy's picture and story as the cover, things will really explode.

[nofurylike]

14. many, especially local news outlets, covered, then they stopped and

it was only overseas and u.s. alter-media.

now is major msm here AND international.

it is a huge shift,

and the first flash of the very effect you are pointing out in the fact that People Mag, etc will be covering, soon.

all this from someone who spends countless hours doing media rapid-response to correct them and wake them.

off for now, though.


peace, ALL!!

[nofurylike]

3. the news here is that it made msmedia at all. look back just hours.

now, it is appearing widely.

and think how it would have appeared in the WaPost - IF it ever would have - just months ago.

AND it has Cindy saying how the blogs came through while msmedia didn't.

this is a major shift.

see other articles being posted.


peace!

[Erika]

5. Agreed 100%

She's doing the job.

[nofurylike]

15. most excellently, yes. thanks! eom

[txindy]

7. Cindy is going to be on the cover of People magazine

She'll be interviewed by Time and Vanity Fair tomorrow, according to Will Pitt. Somehow, I doubt those articles will be as disparaging as this one was. "We love you, Cindy!" made the bloggers sound like fanboys/girls. :eyes:

Yes, attention of any kind is better than being ignored, but this article is really the first I've read that is so obviously biased. THAT'S my point.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

20. "stray"? "Liberal" Press, my tush!!!! n/t

[nofurylike]

8. thank you, GO. now the number 2 world story on google news

http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn&q=

huge


peace!

[The_Casual_Observer]

9. What a grudging snarky little piece by this Faler, is that guy

in chimp's pocket too?

[txindy]

11. Thank you

I'm not the only one who thought the piece was negative, then.

[The_Casual_Observer]

12. It's like they forced the guy to write about it, against his will.

The part about the "stray congresswoman" was beyond the limits of journalism and deep into personal angst.

[Generic Other]

13. They're mad because WE scooped them

A peasant revolt! Any news is good news.

[nofurylike]

16. yes! they are! and i must say that having your concentrated lists

of links made the hit count on what coverage there was, really add up!
enough to now see this!

thank you for all you do, Generic Other!


peace!

[Generic Other]

17. And DUers largely helped get the word out!

Amazing.

Cindy's Army.

[nofurylike]

28. "Cindy's Army" yes!! eom

[Nothing Without Hope]

18. The LA Times story on Cindy Sheehan is TERRIFIC!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2000891
Thread title: LA Times:"Mother's Protest at Bush's Doorstep Raises the Stakes" GOOD!!!

And Maureen Dowd's piece in the Houston Chronicle was also published (under a different title) in the New York Times. So, adding in the rather paltry and condescending effort from the Washington Post, we've got stories in all three top US papers, and two of the three were positive and supportive. History is being made!

[frictionlessO]

19. Uh Brian Faler, your horns are showing... you begrudging shallow

little twit!

What? Were you on your way over to get one rubbed out by some imported exotic dancer, when all of a sudden you got saddled to write a piece that goes against your pro war ethics?

Why don't you support the troops? Why do you hate our freedom, our liberty... or are you truly like the rest of the bushbots and have failed to recognize that "This is what Democracy looks like"?

Welcome to America, Brian...

Stray Congresswoman indeed!

[JPZenger]

25. Faler Was a Freelancer Covering Blogs

Faler was apparently a freelancer who covered political blogs for the Post. The words "special to the Post" have been deleted, so apparently he is now an employee. Here is an article that questioned a previous article by him:

http://tapscottscopydesk.blogspot.com/2005/05/who-is-brian-faler-and-why-is.html

"Who is Brian Faler and Why is The Washington Post Publishing His FEC 'Reporting'?

Editorial leaders at major MSM outlets like The Washington Post often claim their organizations are more reliable because they employee only trained professionals who are always subject to multiple layers of editing to insure accuracy and fairness. The often-hollow reality of such claims is demonstrated yet again today on the Post's Federal Page in an article on the FEC and bloggers written by Brian Faler. The byline describes Faler's article as "Special to the Post," which usually indicates a free lancer. No information about Faler qualifications or professional associations are provided.

Faler offers Post readers a lot of opinion but little to indicate the credibility of those expressing the opinions. For example, Faler repeatedly cites sources such as "some observers," "some election law experts" "others pushing for" "those who want additional disclosure requirements " and "some said." Yet Faler quotes only one named person favoring new FEC disclosure regulations for bloggers and only two other named people appear in the story, current FEC Chairman Scott Thomas and former FEC Commissioner Trevor Potter. Faler identifies neither Thomas nor Potter as advocates for new FEC regulations, though the former seems to be and the latter is on record as a vigorous supporter of new regulations.

Captain Ed isn't too impressed with Faler's reporting, either, noting that his Post piece is more accurately described as something meant "to scare people, and Congress, into fighting the proposed exemption for bloggers by creating a strawman of rampant corruption in the blogosphere that doesn't exist."

[frictionlessO]

27. Ahh good... nice to know Im not the only one who has taken a displeasure

to this twerp.

Thanks for posting that seriously...

[Jersey Devil]

21. More snarkiness - bloggers "gushed" over the protest

That was some pretty bad writing.

[melissinha]

22. Its a matter of 1 vs 34 congressmen nothing more

Many times the Washington Post DOES exhibit negativity towards democrats and the plights of democrats, but in this instance, it was just a short rather plain article. I think the only paragraph that can be questioned is the first one as she has the support of what 34 congressmen now not a one congresswoman... but overall its not like the Dana Milbank's article on the Democratic DSM Forum.

Sure its not gushing like the rest, what do we respect. I think if you have a reason to complain about this it would be about the facts over number of COngressmen who report this, nothing more.

I support Cindy like the rest of you, but just looking to pick a fight with a paper that DID cover Cindy's story and with a paper that did not succumb to the right wing smear campaign is not productive. Just call them on the facts in a nice way and leave it at that. Its how we operate, with truth and facts, not conjecture.

Frankly, our snarkiness (I most definitely include myself) is getting downright counterproductive. You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

[Bumblebee]

23. It's a "nothing" article, patronising and dismissive

which is offensive, given what she is, but mostly just about nothing. But isn't it what the WP is these days, for most part? A "nothing" paper?

[democratic veteran]

24. The Post

has to sell to Republicans too. Pretty mediocre report.

[buddha8]

26. a movement

ITs time for thousands now to swarm down in Texas and swell the Sheehan ranks. People are so dog-trained by the Media that they are waiting around,hugging their monitors and praying for a leader to emerge to show them what to do. Isn't it obvious? This is the beginning of a true,nation wide grassroots protest to withdraw immediately from the lie that is Iraq. Where are the people who are willing to step forward and be part of a huge happening for peace and justice? Now is the time. If its not embraced when will it be? How much more provacation and insantiy do you need to witness before motivation sets in?

Wondering about this story and that and whether they have legs or no is absurd at this juncture. The people can make the story if they so chose. Do you think Ghandi or King would be sitting around tracking the feasibility of this thing right now? No, they would be participating and leading. Maybe Americans just aren't ready yet. Maybe there hasn't been near enough suffering and madness. Maybe we need a joint and hellacious American-Israeli bombing campaign over Teheran which is for sure coming anyway to 'inspire' the sheeple. Who can say? But why that ditch in Texas is not filled with hundreds of thousands of protestors is beyond me. Maybe the Media really has won in its subliminal effort to pacify and render wholly docile the general public. I would like to beleive otherwise but maybe I'm wrong. People are much more concerned with the next blurb,news piece or factoid than with really participating. Maybe the Media has succeeded in deballing Public Conscience. I think perhaps they have.

It is time to organize New Nuremburg Trials to be held across the Net and indict the pseudo-journalists who participated in War cheerleading for the Pentagon. It is time to let them know that they must be called to justice for crimes against humanity. It is time to disseminate a list of nominees for this infamous dock widely across the Net. Let them know that there is no immunity from the perpetration of lies,propaganda and distortions to further criminal wars.