The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Vandals or sanctions?

On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 04:22:15 +0000 (GMT), you wrote:

>Many of Grayham's arguments hinge on how the media might project certain
>forms of protest.
And more importantly ,the resulting perception that the public has of
us when we try and tell them exactly why we oppose the sanctions .

>While I agree that media coverage is important, I think
>that any campaign cannot afford to rely too heavily on how the media
>covers it. 
True.  So how else can  we convey the message ?
I am not  saying  that  I believe the media to be fair (far from it) .
My point is  that for most people their only contact with " politics "
is through the papers/radio/TV .
I fully acknowledge that there is a dilemna in getting the media
attention ; a peaceful march will barely get a mention but one where
there is violence will get headlines . But will the publicity
generated get you or lose you support ?
>.................................... Will Iraq sell papers?
Probably not and it may well suit the government  for it not to be
front-page news too often because the reasons that are given for the
bombings do not stand up to scrutiny and the horrific effects of the
sanctions would offend the readers .  We need to get this information
across to  the public  so that they will join the campaign.
>And paradoxically, a 'vandal' will make headlines and bring into focus
>that there REALLY ARE people who don't think bombing Iraq is a Good Thing.
I agree ,but  it will bring the issue to people's atttention for a
brief spell and it will be in a negative way .

>This might not necessarily cause people to rethink their position,
>assuming they have one. But then again, it might. 
>From what I have been finding , when people are told the realities
they rethink their postion  anyway . 
>> Give them any excuse to print stories that show people
>> breaking the law and in the minds of the general public  will be the
>> idea that supporters of this protest are all guilty of criminal acts
>> and many people will not want to be involved with it .
>If the 'general public' is really so easy to manipulate in these
>directions, then we should disband CASI because the cause is hopeless.
I disagree  , it comes down to who is doing the manipulating and for
what reason.  And  (accepting that your point was hypothetical)  it is
from lists like this that  many of us rely on for getting accurate
information that  we can then use to build our discussions on . As I
said above , when people are aware of the facts most want to see
something done about it .
>I don't think there is any particular reason why if they/we can have
>changed their minds before, they might not do so again, and in directions
>which we desire. 
Most people will accept our case as  and when it is explained to them

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]