Mother Zucker!
NBC: Olympic Advertisers Unfazed By Protests.
And so blares the insensitive and completely disgusting headline from the Reuters article.
I don’t plan to do multiple posts about protests against Chinas human rights violations but I just had to say something about how sad this article (and many others) makes me.
I’ll pull just one excerpt from the article and then reflect on how I interpret what is being said.
“Zucker [NBC’s CEO] told Reuters in an interview that Olympic advertising prices have been "incredibly strong" despite political tensions and anti-China protests ahead of the August games in Beijing.
"The fact is the Olympics are a sporting event on the world stage," he said. "It's not surprising that some would try to use that stage to further their own causes, and we understand that, but at the end of the day this is about the event and both the advertisers and our viewers understand that."”
I see this article as nothing more than the empire talking back to the empire. By that I mean its big corporate investors communicating to other big corporate investors via the corporate media with a message that is basically saying, “don’t worry about your investments, your money is in no danger. We are selling advertising spots and making you richer, don’t worry about “the people” of the world and what they are trying to say. We both know that in the end it is us, the ones with the most money and hence the most power, who will have the last word.”
And when Zucker refers to his lack of surprise that “some would try to use that stage to further their own causes” I want to scream! What the hell is wrong with this man? He makes the protesters sound like freaks, like they are the ones in the wrong because they are using the media to get their message out to the world. “Their message”, what about it is “theirs”? Because it is coming from the protesters mouth that makes it only “their” message?
Since when did human rights and freedom only become a message of the few?
These protesters are their voicing their opinion because they cant not take a stand!
I’ve been following Big media coverage of these protests and been paying attention to the language they use to describe protesters. They are repeatedly being referred to as “Anti China” or “Pro Tibet”. Which is interesting because Tibet and China are countries, pieces of land, not people. These demonstrators have taken to the streets not against pieces of land but for the rights of the people living within these man made boundaries.
If I were to name the protesters with any appropriate measure I think “Pro Human Rights” might fit the bill.
Does anyone else read the news in this way, with a critical eyed turned toward what language is being used and whose voice is being reported? If so what do you think? Do you think the protesters and “their” message are being unjustly marginalized?
And so blares the insensitive and completely disgusting headline from the Reuters article.
I don’t plan to do multiple posts about protests against Chinas human rights violations but I just had to say something about how sad this article (and many others) makes me.
I’ll pull just one excerpt from the article and then reflect on how I interpret what is being said.
“Zucker [NBC’s CEO] told Reuters in an interview that Olympic advertising prices have been "incredibly strong" despite political tensions and anti-China protests ahead of the August games in Beijing.
"The fact is the Olympics are a sporting event on the world stage," he said. "It's not surprising that some would try to use that stage to further their own causes, and we understand that, but at the end of the day this is about the event and both the advertisers and our viewers understand that."”
I see this article as nothing more than the empire talking back to the empire. By that I mean its big corporate investors communicating to other big corporate investors via the corporate media with a message that is basically saying, “don’t worry about your investments, your money is in no danger. We are selling advertising spots and making you richer, don’t worry about “the people” of the world and what they are trying to say. We both know that in the end it is us, the ones with the most money and hence the most power, who will have the last word.”
And when Zucker refers to his lack of surprise that “some would try to use that stage to further their own causes” I want to scream! What the hell is wrong with this man? He makes the protesters sound like freaks, like they are the ones in the wrong because they are using the media to get their message out to the world. “Their message”, what about it is “theirs”? Because it is coming from the protesters mouth that makes it only “their” message?
Since when did human rights and freedom only become a message of the few?
These protesters are their voicing their opinion because they cant not take a stand!
I’ve been following Big media coverage of these protests and been paying attention to the language they use to describe protesters. They are repeatedly being referred to as “Anti China” or “Pro Tibet”. Which is interesting because Tibet and China are countries, pieces of land, not people. These demonstrators have taken to the streets not against pieces of land but for the rights of the people living within these man made boundaries.
If I were to name the protesters with any appropriate measure I think “Pro Human Rights” might fit the bill.
Does anyone else read the news in this way, with a critical eyed turned toward what language is being used and whose voice is being reported? If so what do you think? Do you think the protesters and “their” message are being unjustly marginalized?
posted by Corey at 6:45 PM
1 Comments:
way to go world priorities.hey bro
Post a Comment
<< Home