Unless this is the first political convention in the modern era that doesn't have one single, solitary protestor, I find the lack of protest coverage from the three major (ABC, NBC, CBS) nightly newscasts "interesting." Let me be the first to call it: when the Republican National Convention starts in late August, these same three networks will barely be able to contain themselves in showing the protests. I imagine it might even be the top story on one or two of the nights. <br><br>Meanwhile, back here in July, nary a drop of coverage from any of the protesting going on outside the Fleet Center. <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:red]VOTE for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

well, the democrats are in the heart of liberal america and you want protesters? HA. i'll tell you how to get protests...be conservative and hold a convention in new york city. <br><br>--<br>"It is worth seeing, debating and thinking about, regardless of your political allegiances...[Moore's] most disciplined and powerful movie to date." -- A.O. Scott, NEW YORK TIMES

You're right--no coverage at all, although before the convention there was lots of coverage of complaints about where the protestors were going to be placed.<br><br>But then, the major networks are not exactly going overboard in covering the convention--nor the Reps next month either, from what I hear. Sad sad sad sad sad.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>But then, the major networks are not exactly going overboard in covering the convention-<p><hr></blockquote><p>While they're not devoting much, if any, time during prime time (and it is sad, I agree), they are covering the convention on their nightly newscasts, with Brokaw, Jennings and Rather on-site at the Fleet Center. What these nightly newscasts aren't doing is devoting any coverage (up to day two at least) to the protests going on outside. <br><br>I wonder if we'll make day two during the RNC without any coverage of protests going on outside MSG? Hmmmmm .. <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:red]VOTE for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>

We'll see. I just don't watch network news at all, so I don't know what they're doing. The Lehrer News Hour hasn't said peep about protests, though--which I find really strange. I still remember '68 and "the whole world is watching."<br><br>

There was some mention of it on NPR, but it wasn't much. Then again, the very second Heinz's speech was over they cut everything and went to the regularly scheduled program. So, in all, the coverage of the event isn't too strong. <br><br><br><br>----<br><br>Homeland Security Advisory

same here...i cannot remember the last time i watched the nightly news on the networks. honestly, it's been years. i heard some mention of the protest cages on NPR. <br><br>--<br>"It is worth seeing, debating and thinking about, regardless of your political allegiances...[Moore's] most disciplined and powerful movie to date." -- A.O. Scott, NEW YORK TIMES

joe scarborough (msnbc) is visiting the free speech zone for protesters right now and the kid is asking why the media is not covering things (and, this kid said he's liberal)...joe is saying it is ridiculous that the freedom cage was set up to be so inhospitable and that the media knew nobody would want to go in it. now, he's talking with a dubya supporter. ooh, a gal just went CRAZY yelling something and joe backed away from the fence a bit and this woman kept shrieking. what a disruption and disservice to other protesters. finally, someone pulled her away. now i can see why the media wants to stay away. i feared for joe's safety. <br><br>--<br>"It is worth seeing, debating and thinking about, regardless of your political allegiances...[Moore's] most disciplined and powerful movie to date." -- A.O. Scott, NEW YORK TIMES

I might be speaking out of complete ignorance, but my guess is that because of the risk of terrorist attacks, no protester could get within a mile of the convention. Maybe that's why we don't see any.<br><br>

Well Matt,<br><br>I live in Cambridge, Ma, so I've been on top of the local news all week. They specifically talked about protests and marches, and how they just haven't been as large as expected. Some protests were even cancelled due to lack of interest. So that probably has something to do with the lack of coverage. They SHOULD be covering how countless small businesses around down are losing money hand over fist, because everybody was scared into not coming into town, and how the delegates aren't spending much money at all, let alone enough to make up for the people who have avoided Boston this week.<br><br>Of course, the liberal media here (or at least the channel I was watching this morning) did decide to cover the "Billionaires for Bush" march. I guess the protests are worth covering if they bash Bush.<br><br>