35,000 at a pro-Israel rally is not news

Can you find a news source for the rally against Ahmadinejad at the UN yesterday? Correction: Can you find a non-Jewish media source, or a non-blogger source, for the rally?

I can’t. Except for the New York Sun.

I checked AP. Nothing. Reuters. Nada. I checked Google News. Nothing. 1010WINS. Nothing. I checked WABC, NY1, all the New York media sites. Gridlock alerts are the only thing you can find about the march. After all, it’s not newsworthy. The fact that 2,000 people marched a day earlier to protest the Iraq war? Oh, yeah, that made the news.

35,000 people protesting against a man who wants to “wipe Israel from the map”? Not newsworthy at all. John Bolton speaking? Who? Elie Wiesel? George Pataki? Who?

Some 35,000 people rallied across from the United Nations to protest Ahmadinejad’s presence at the world body. The crowd also wanted to show solidarity for Israel and implore the United Nations to enforce Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended Israel’s war this summer with Hezbollah and calls for the release of three Israeli soldiers taken hostage by Hamas and Hezbollah.

Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Presidents Conference, referred to Ahmadinejad’s Tuesday night speech to the General Assembly, in which he portrayed the creation of Israel as aggression against the Muslim world.

“He’s constantly lied and misrepresented the truth,” Hoenlein said, “and he comes and lectures the rest of the world?”

The rally drew dozens of speakers, including Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel, New York Gov. George Pataki and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz.

If you want to read about the rally, it appears that you have to go to the bloggers who were there, or whose readers sent in pictures. Or the Israeli press. Or the Jewish media. But nowhere else can you find any evidence that 35,000 people protested the Iranian president’s message of hate.

However, watch for the zillion headlines on this news story next week:

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Among demonstrations planned for next week’s American Legion national convention and President Bush’s visit is one calling for “Death to Israel.”

Laura Green, director of the United Jewish Federation of Utah, said Thursday that she has received dozens of calls about the demonstration planned near City Hall on Wednesday. Many fear the rally could incite violence against Jews.

Amazing, isn’t it, that the AP can cover that story, but can’t seem to be bothered noticing that Dag Hammerskjold Plaza was full of anti-Iran protesters yesterday.

The news media doesn’t think that 35,000 people protesting the president of Iran outside the UN is worth a story. But 2,000 people protesting the Iraq war? Now that’s news.

Update: The New York Daily News mentioned the rally. I missed it.

Update 2: WNYC, New York’s public television/radio station, has added the story today.

This entry was posted in Iran, Israel, Media Bias. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to 35,000 at a pro-Israel rally is not news

  1. Paul says:

    The liberal MSM talks a good game, but that’s it. If 35,000 Jews were in railcars, the only MSM story would be of traffic delays at railroad crossings and a feature on what soccer moms do with bored kids in a stopped suv.

    5,000 rockets on Israel. Nada, nothing, zip. Israel drops two precision-guided bombs on a Hezzi bunker, every show for days.

  2. Peter says:

    The proper action here is clear.

    Contact your local paper and ask why they have no story on this subject.

    Suggest that the lack of coverage is an interesting story of it’s own.

    See if any actual reporters still exist at the local level.

  3. bill reeves says:

    What do you expect? In the mainstream media’s eyes Jews cannot be victims, only perps.

    Yet I’ll bet the NYT is more heavily subscribed and supported by Jews than any other ethnic group.

    Why do Jews continue to support institutions that are indifferent to whether they live or die?

    Just wondering.

  4. Anonymous says:

    It’s interesting to note Barbra Streisand’s Blog has been silent since 4-24-06. She had posted a negative news item critical of Bush early in August 06 and it was removed the next day. Nothing since. Her silence could be PR related to her Tour or perhaps she is beginning to connect the dots.

  5. Anonymous says:

    This lack of coverage is about election 2006. If the press covers this story, it helps Lieberman’s campaign and the Republicans. The press is liberal, they want democrats to take control of the House & Senate and back Lamont. Somebody better wake up and see whats going on. There are real SERIOUS issues here with Iran.

  6. The Toe says:

    The easy solution is to call the local media and say “We are having a big rally to protest Bush!!” That is when they will show up.

  7. Bob Miller says:

    The real news is inconvenient to journalists with a cause. They have created virtual news and suppressed real news so often and for so long that we take this as normal. Meryl is right that we should rattle their cages. I hope the critical letters are judged “fit to print”.

  8. Whitehall says:

    You guys still read a newspaper? Why would anyone waste their time and contaminate their mind that way?

    All the more for TV, news magazines, etc.

    This is another reason to save your cash and ignore them and their advertisers.

    The message must be “Serve or wither.”

  9. jim says:

    I originally drafted a longish comment about the “factor of a thousand” principle. That is, news media apparently divide matters that are counter to their own preferences by three orders of magnitude when assessing news worthiness.

    Thus, the 35,000 demonstration would look like just 35 to them. To get the coverage equivalent to the 2,000 anti-Iraq demonstration that matches their own preferences, the demonstration would have needed to be 2,000,000 in number.

    The problem is that some things are such a perfect match for the media that the 1,000 factor is not enough. The recent “Peace Mom” stuff is a case in point. Some of her “events” had fewer than 35 and had a LOT of coverage. Maybe it’s 1000 for anti-Iraq and another, say, 100 for anti-Bush? That would mean that the 35,000 demonstration would have had to number 3,500,000 to get her level of coverage.

    Maybe it’s not media bias. After all, today’s reporters and editors all grew up with that “new math.”

  10. Easycure says:

    Thanks for enlightening us. I would not have known about this protest unless you had wrote about it and Glenn and linked to it.

    Some of us are wide awake in Seattle because of your (and other bloggers) efforts.

  11. ScottG says:

    “It’s interesting to note Barbra Streisand’s Blog has been silent since 4-24-06…Her silence could be PR related to her Tour or perhaps she is beginning to connect the dots.”

    Nope, Bush sent her to Gitmo in the middle of the night. Hee Hee!

  12. spectre765 says:

    The MSM isn’t even ashamed of their manipulation of the news anymore. It’s all out in the open. They don’t care if you know about their biases, they will do as they please. Unbelievable.

    I stand with Israel and it’s people. I’m not a Jew, but in times like these I wish I was.

  13. Thank you I would have been completely unaware of this event and I watch Fox news.

  14. Anonymous says:

    It’s quite clear. The next time Jews hold a demonstration they’ll just have to wear ski masks and burn some cars. It works for the terrorists.

  15. Joel says:

    The New York Sun is by far the best newspaper in New York City. Editorially the New York Post is good but the newspaper is becoming a British style semi porn tabloid.

  16. jrh says:

    There was also this:

  17. jrh, your link (or excerpt) didn’t come through. Can you post it again?

  18. Look what I found in regards to a protest that WAS reported on the SAME DAY!


  19. Michael says:

    1) 35,000 protest Ahmadinejad’s speach outside UN
    2) No news coverage of Rally
    3) As per Scot Silverstein “… it is as clear evidence of world news media collusion and bias as any”
    4) Barbra Streisand’s web page silent since 4-24-06. Critical remarks of Bush posted early August 06 removed next day and nothing since.
    5) Liberal press, election 2006, control of house and senate
    6) Lamont vs. Lieberman

    Connect the Dots

  20. skip says:

    If coverage of Israel and Jewish causes were adjusted for % of US population there wouldn’t be mention of an anti-arab or anti-Iran demonstration for the next 20 years. MEMRI gets more nuanced stuff into the newspaper than all the muslim world combined. Israel gets more 10X the copy of the entire African continent on a yearly basis.

    This is a ludicrous complaint. Save your bile for substantive arguments. All you do here is make Walt and Mearsheimer look right.

  21. Paul says:

    The media, in large part, is no friend of the Jews and it doesn’t report all of the news either !

  22. Normally, I don’t approve comments like Skip’s, but his is so perfect an example of the typical anti-Israel/anti-Jewish comment that I’m leaving it as a museum piece.

    He didn’t even get Walt & Mearsheimer’s criticisms right. They claim that “the Israel Lobby” controls the foreign policy of the United States. By complaining that the mainstream media ignores a pro-Israel rally, I am proving their claims true.

    Great logic, Skip. I’m guessing you didn’t pass that class in high school.

    Let me also point out that there the demonstration was not anti-Arab nor was it anti-Iran. It was anti-Ahmadinejad, the modern-day Haman who wants to wipe Israel off the map.

    And lastly, we have the “Shut up, whiny Jew!” argument.

    Shyeah, all of those go well on my blog. Thanks for playing, Skip, and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

  23. Rahel says:

    I have the feeling that those who complain about MEMRI are the same types who would punish the messenger for bearing bad news … or the alarm clock for waking them up.

  24. MikeM says:

    At least one of the Baltimore TV stations did live covverage of people gathering to board the buses heading for NY for the protest. Unfortunately, I didn’t have time for the evening newscast, so I don’t know if they did a follow-up.

  25. msm says:

    Who counted 35,000 people? The most I see in any photo is a thousand or two, and most non-telephoto lens photos show at most a few dozen. People holding signs is not news, sorry, unless the numbers are huge. Protests happen at the UN, White House and Congress daily. Doesn’t mean that issue and that concern isn’t being covered in other venues in the news.
    Stop being rabid dittoheads and use your own brains, folks. There is no conspiracy against Jews in the media. Look into Occhem’s Razor and also look into the sources that are feeding all of this info. Do they NOT have anything to gain by planting the idea of a conspiracy against Israel? Why be so prepared to believe and blindly trust someone with an agenda than to trust (or at least be willing to consider) someone who has none? Otherwise, you are just as bad as your opponents.

  26. RMc says:

    The easy solution is to call the local media and say “We are having a big rally to protest Bush!!”

    Actually, the thing to do is call ’em up and say, “We’re protesting that crazy, warmongerering religious zealot!” Of course, the media might not stay long when they realize you were referring to Ahmadinejad and not Bush, but…

  27. Who said there was a conspiracy against Jews?

    Stop being a rabid ignoramus and trying reading my post, MSM. And gee, great scientific method for counting the number of people at the rally. “I didn’t see that many in the photos.” Wow, your brainpower is killing us.

    The bias is evident in that the media will not cover a protest against Ahmadinejad, but they will cover a protest against Bush.

    They will not cover a pro-Israel rally, even if there are half a million people lining the streets of NYC. But they will cover an anti-Israel rally, even if it’s only a few dozen people.

    This is bias. It isn’t conspiracy. Search my archives for the details of the pro- and anti-Israel rally coverage.

  28. Jake says:

    From my perspective, this could be the biggest example of media malpractice we have seen yet. Fauxtography, AP terrorist reporter, Jason Blair, any of the others – for some reason this just strikes me as the worst. My bet is that there are others out there like me, that the outrage will build over the next couple of days, and this will bubble up into the MSM as another case where they have to look inward into their souls and see the basic political bias and racism that exists there.

  29. skip says:

    “Thanks for playing, Skip, and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.”

    Along with:

    “Leave a reply. Keep it civil.”

    Free admission, pay at the door. Get your seat, sit on the floor. Catskills humor goes so well with the argument that Israel gets short shrift in the US media. Just as pleas for civility go so well with rude rejoinders devoid of content.

  30. Jim in Texas says:

    Where did the 2,000 number come from? I couldn’t find it in the referenced news articles

  31. Sure, Skip. Because accusing me of forwarding the Walt-Mearsheimer agenda is a very civil thing to do. And “Save your bile for substantive arguments” is a very civil thing to say. Why, no civilized person would consider that insulting at all.


  32. Jim, I saw it in one of the articles on the anti-Iraq march. Can’t remember which.

  33. chsw says:

    Maybe the UN march would have received coverage if Jewish marchers would have beheaded someone.


  34. cond0010 says:

    Gee Skip,

    Your post (#30) is just too nuanced for my conservative brain to understand. Could you speak a little more plainly?

  35. To view videos from the rally go to http://www.onejerusalem.org

  36. Reuters? AP? NBC? You expected them to take the US side (in support of Israel)??

    They’re all puppets of George Soros and his mouth piece – moveone.org

    BTW – Well-documented piece. Cross-posted to my blog.


  37. Solomon2 says:

    Perhaps AP was there but simply decided not to distribute the story. AP has its Middle East News Service: “customised international news and broadcast service for television clients” – censorship paid for by patrons from the Gulf Arab states – that pretty much passes judgment on whether any Israel-related video AP collects gets distributed. These are the possibly the guys who decided not to publish anything about the rally – not even in print. At times like this, when AP reporters are there yet the story doesn’t reach print, isn’t AP acting more like an intelligence service reporting to its masters than any kind of “news” agency?

  38. LetBeFair says:

    Look. Since no one besides the Sun, whether liberal or conservative covered the march aren’t the comments about the lack of coverage being due to the liberal media a bit nonsensical

  39. Branson Duarte says:

    I hope CNN’s Glenn Beck will talk about this on TV.

Comments are closed.