Here’s a headline from the Sunday, January 20th, 2013 online edition of the New York Daily News:
Excerpts from the article:
“Some 600 attendees in Austin, Texas”… “About 2,000 people — [...] — turned out for the chilly outdoor rally at the New York state capitol in Albany.” … “Police in Connecticut said about 1,000 people showed up on the capitol grounds in Hartford” … “Those gathered elsewhere expressed similar concern”.
So, at least 3,600 people were explicitly mentioned in the article, as well as references to a rally in Augusta, Georgia. Considering the number of firearms permits in Georgia, it’s a safe bet to assume that at least 300-400 people showed up there. So – 3600 definite attendees in only 3 cities mentioned, and most likely at least 4,000 if you include the 4th.
Apparently, in the eyes of the same media that happily reported a 400,000-participant (according to the National Park Service) event as a “Million Man March”, at least 4000 attendees at a counter-liberal event is “hundreds”. Oh no, we can’t admit that thousands of people turned out across dozens of cities in support for this event, we have to continue pushing the “fringe group” narrative. Nevermind that we’re doing to use a term that’s mathematically AND linguistically inappropriate, considering the order-of-magnitude change.
The article concludes with a note that (despite the constant narrative that all supporters of gun rights are crazy dangerous madmen who shoot everyone in sight) “authorities reported no problems at early rallies, which remained peaceful Saturday afternoon”. Looks like even after 100’s of Tea Party rallies and other Conservative/right-wing protests – without a SINGLE incident, the mass media still can’t believe that Conservatives can assemble peacefully. Meanwhile, the 4000+ arrests related to Occupy Whatever go largely unreported.
That being said, I have 2 questions for the editorial staff of the New York Daily News:
1.) Why did you use the term “hundreds” instead of the mathematically and linguistically more appropriate “thousands” in your headline? Was it an egregious error in math (excusable considering the sorry state of the US educational system), or was it an intentional attempt to downplay the amount of support for this event, in line with the narrative that pro-gun-rights groups are a “fringe”?
2.) Considering that the event called for peaceful protests in every state capital, why did you mention only New York, Hartford, Austin, and Augusta? What happened to the demonstrations in the other 46 states (or, if you listen to Mr. Obama, the other 53 states)? You did mention “elsewhere” – so you were aware of other gatherings – where’s the rest of the information? If there were no protests, wouldn’t you mention that fact – since it would play handily into your “fringe group” narrative? But if there were, is your omission intentional? If you didn’t have any data, why wouldn’t you take the standard disclaimer that “attendance figures were not available as of the time this article was written”?
P.S. By the way, you guys might want to proof-read your articles a little, prior to publication. “…said Joe Getchell of Pittsfield, Maine, who attended a rally in Augusta rally.”
UPDATE 1 (01/20/2013): Meanwhile, true patriots like Rides A Pale Horse, co-blogger at Zilla of the Resistance, are reminding people that the 2nd Amendment is THE “1st” Amendment in terms of importance. It is precisely the right to bear arms, to oppose tyranny, that allows rights to exist in the first place. Visit Zilla’s blog & check out the tribute to Charlton Heston at the “In Recognition of Gun Appreciation Day” post.
UPDATE 2 (01/22/2013): Nice Deb has a HUGE lineup of videos from the various GAD protests across the country. Vermont, Minnessota, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Ohio, Maryland, Texas, Michigan, Kansas, Illinois, Missouri…
CONSERVATIVE BLOGGERS -
DOING THE JOB THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA
IS TOO PREJUDICED TO DO.