3 ms·
> The U.S. media has virtually exclusively covered the protests in Hong Kong, and barely mentions any of the other (often larger and more violent) protests. Th
by adventured 7y ago
> The U.S. media has virtually exclusively covered the protests in Hong Kong, and barely mentions any of the other (often larger and more violent) protests.
That's clearly not true and very easy to disprove.
Iraq, Iran, Chile, Colombia, Bolivia have all gotten continued coverage in US media. I can provide, say, 100 links to stories spanning all the major US news sources for those protests if you require it, dating back to the beginnings of the protests in Chile and going forward.
NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, NY Post, NPR, TIME, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, The Hill, Bloomberg, Voice of America, Reuters US, CNBC and so on have in total covered all of the protests persistently.
A quick drop into Google news with "Iraq protests" or "Iran protests" or "Bolivia protests" or "Chile protests" pulls up a lot of US news articles spanning the totality of the protests in question. Chile got enormous coverage in particular.
- jethro_tell 7y agowell, sure, if you're reading your news. I'm not sure why someone's surprised this didn't bump the dog riding a tricycle from evening news shows?
- dv_dt 7y agoTry France general strike protests to see a relative pacuity of coverage in the US media - one round at the start, and 6-7 days later, another round as the government moves a bit. Maybe a smattering a couple days ago. I think the assertion is not there is no coverage, just little coverage - and that's difficult to prove with data as it's a judgement call as to how much is too much or too little. It ends up a matter of opinion for the most part.