If a Protest Happens in DC ...

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot of Electoral Math

... but the press doesn't cover it, does it really matter?

I think that the answer is yes. Taking a historical view, mostly by looking at the Vietnam War and its opposition, modern anti-war forces are significantly more successful in influencing public opinion.

The Vietnam War really got going in August 1964, with the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. At the time, public support for the escalation was widespread, and it took the "failings" of the January 1968 Tet Offensive (which were in fact massive losses for the opposition, but provided lots of compelling imagery that sapped support for the war in America) to force mainstream disapproval of the war. Still, neither Kennedy nor McCarthy would win the Presidential nomination in '68, leaving the more pro-war Hubert Humphrey to lead the ticket. Public support for the war rebounded a bit by Feburary of '69, and again by March of 1970, but completely collapsed by January of 1971. So, it's possible that the six-and-a-half year slide towards opposition will be completed in two-and-a-half years this time around. Sure, the threat of Saddam was never as large as the global threat of communism, but surely that alone can't explain the five-year acceleration of the anti-war movement. Today's protest received second billing behind Katrina/Rita coverage. That's not too shabby for thirty-months worth of opposition.

Like wise, the mythical power granted to Joan Baez and her compatriots is, well, mythical, but war-opposing celebreties enjoy much more success today than they did in the sixties. Credence Clearwater Revival had four top-selling singles between 1969 and and 1970, none of which were their class-warfare, anti-Vietnam anthem "Fortunate Son", which never cracked the annual top 100. James Taylor, Buffalo Springfield, CSNY -- these bands sold far fewer records than the Temptations, the Stones, the Jackson 5, or Marvin Gaye. Today, "Wake Me Up When September Ends" is at the top of the charts nationally, and is more popular in Red media markets than Blue ones. The major Vietnam-as-quagmire movies -- Platoon, Apocalypse Now, Hamburger Hill, -- all came out well after the war was over. In the present, Farenheit 9/11 drew huge audiences during the election cycle, and Good Night, and Good Luck is on its way. I would call that progress.

Sure, anti-war sentiment has a tough road to hoe without support from high-profile political leaders. Like Big Media Matt (and others), I'm highly skeptical about the ability of these large-scale protests to force political change. If you have a huge press conference, it's just not sexy enough for the networks to cover (this is not a new phenomenon; just ask John Kerry about his feelings about the Fourth Estate). But, if you cause to much of a ruckus, you play into the "dirty hippie/blame America first" stereotype. Further complicating matters is the press's singling out of the giant puppet crowd over the everyday moms and dads, who apparently aren't interesting enough to get on television. But all is not lost; the peaceniks of today seem to be having much better luck reaching a wide audience than the dirtie hippies of yesteryear did. Even if they still don't have enough message discipline.