Sunday, September 25, 2005
ISSUE: How should media judge the size of a crowd? Does it matter?
AferDowningStreet.ORG is an anti-war coalition blog. On Sunday it carries a post claiming "The Associated Press lied" in reporting that "tens of thousands" of people marched in Washington on Saturday. The DC police chief estimated that at least 100,000 had marched, but gave no precise estimate. The U.S. National Park Service police, who control public parks around the Capitol and White House, declined to give an estimate. Organizers, and some participants, said they believe the number to have been more than 100,000.
QUESTIONS: What is the significance of the size of the crowd? How does it compare to other protests in Washington, D.C., in an historical context? Is the decision of the park police to give no estimates a political decision? In the absence of an official estimate, should the news media attempt by some valid means to estimate the crowd size? Should the play (air time, page placement) given the story vary on the basis of the size of the crowd? Why or why not?
At AfterDowningStreet.org, commentator Richard J. Schaedler said he thought CSPAN reported the crowed at 600,000 people.
QUESTIONS: What is the significance of the size of the crowd? How does it compare to other protests in Washington, D.C., in an historical context? Is the decision of the park police to give no estimates a political decision? In the absence of an official estimate, should the news media attempt by some valid means to estimate the crowd size? Should the play (air time, page placement) given the story vary on the basis of the size of the crowd? Why or why not?
At AfterDowningStreet.org, commentator Richard J. Schaedler said he thought CSPAN reported the crowed at 600,000 people.
