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]
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