Apparently the corporate media isn't happy with civil disobedience, and they're not happy without it either.

We just can't win with these guys.

Visit the attached url, get mad and write the authors:

sanchezr@washpost.com

boothb@washpost.com

Have fun.

I get to work. The present belongs to these people but the future doesn't.

I'm walking faster. I'm talking louder. We're winning.

Yeah right, like they really are going to be honest about anything. Even when they are factually accurate on details they lie in the overall. Thats why we need our own independent media in every county and every town. Our struggle continues and grows!

If you tried to understand the movement from the perspective of Washington Post articles it might look something like this.

It couldn't exist, nobody would want to stop the perfect invevatable corporate globalization. Some people in the third world might protest, but they don't count. The institutions of multinational corporate capitalism are really doing a good job, they sill poor people just need to stop complaining and work harder. The Asian finical colapse, didn't happen, and anyway it's over now. Protests in the rich countries are just a bunch of whiny rich kids, they don't count either. The Seattle WTO colapse was a fluke, and mainly a result of elites not quite being able to keep the rabble in line. The protests are just violent know-nothing terrorists with no message, so don't listen to them. Labor and the Unions are misguided, they made a mistake, now they've been assured that the Democrats will treat them right. The A16 protests, those were a fluke too, lots of violent know-nothing suburban rich white kid terrorists, who mainly achived blocking some traffic and screwing up my commute.

The protests at the Republican convention in Philly didn't happen, aside from a few kids attacking a limo. In LA, the movement died. Why, well, cus, we're sick of it. We figure we'll write one more article saying the movement is over, then we can ignore them once and for all.

this does not at all surprise me. i was on the east coast in dc when the convention in philly was going down. the post and the times always put any news about protests starting on page A21. in the meanwhile, you had to wade through all this "news" about how inclusive, diverse, and compassionate the gop was. blah blah blah.. they made em look so touchy feely!

i only got to spend one day in philly. so i had limited access to their papers while i was in d.c. i went to places like union station where a wide variety of newspapers were sold. but the only east coast papers sold besides the washington papers (nothing even from baltimore) was the new york times.

if you think the post is bad, the washington times has got to be the most right winged paper i have ever seen! it even puts the orange county register to shame! it is not surpising they would bash the protests, all their main adverstisers in the beltway are lobbyists and politicians.

If the origional author had intended to show that corporate media was incorrectly portraying the protests, they should have picked a different article. This article is, if anything, sympathetic to the protests -- unlike many others. Consider this:

In the second paragraph, the basic platform of the activists is disgussed, although they could have said a bit more, most other articles say nothing.

Everything is factually correct, that is much more than i can say about other articles.

It is clear that, although the protest was not a total failure, it could have accomplished so much more. The greatest problem, that i see was mentioned by this article: There was not enough planning involved. There needs to be a clear adjenda and a clear message -- Although i know this to be untrue, it seemed almost like people looked for a cause to protest at this event, rather than an event at which to protest their cause.

All in all, I find this article to be almost neutral and nearly unbiased. you should be giving the authors a pat on the back.

If you read the content of the article, it doesn't quite live up to the headline. If you are unfamiliar with how newspapers work, let me explain why there is this disconnect between the headline and the article. Newspapers have copyeditors whose responbilities include layout of articles and making sure no errros make it into print. They also write most, if not all, of the headlines. The conclusion that the headline suggests may not be what the writers would have titled the piece. Also, an editor could have made the decision.

Or, the writers really did coin that title.

It's a pretty lame story, very superficial. The criticisms, however, do stick. There's no goal. There's more coherence than they let on, but there are so few concrete demands.

The anti-drug-war forces, in contrast, have a clear message. I have been hearing that message for almost ten years. Over time, it has gelled into something concrete and, I believe, achievable. I think that the anti-globalization movement needs to get back to concrete demands.

If I had my druthers, the issue would be union organzing in the third world where we contract labor, followed by environmental issues there.