The Revolution Will Not Be Televised (Not by the American media, anyhow.)

Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 9 months ago to Politics
5 comments | Share | Flag

For the world, Saturday, February 22 was a day of historic significance — a day when the government of a nation of 46 million, part of the developed world, was toppled by a revolution. Defying the arrangements of Western diplomats, who are always anxious to impose security, the people of Ukraine took possession of their capital and its citadels of power. Parliament turned on the president. The police deserted him. The army deserted him. He fled toward the border, leaving his Russian allies to determine whether they would try to reinstall his regime in a rump Ukraine of native Russian speakers.

In the meantime, what television audience, what television crew, could resist the spectacle? Multitudes in Kiev’s enormous central square, welcoming the archenemy of the ousted president, suddenly liberated from prison, who addressed them from her wheelchair by the light of flaring torches, on the ground where, only days before, protestors had been shot and burned alive on the barricades. Who could resist these scenes as they exploded?

The answer is: the American “news” media.
SOURCE URL: http://www.libertyunbound.com/node/1210


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by mminnick 10 years, 8 months ago
    The main stream media and perhaps all of the media avoided showing the scenes because they didn't fit the picture of the world they wanted shown.
    TheMSM want the world and in particular the US to think that socialism is the way to go. They were not expecting nor did they want a victory by the protesters. At best they thought the Russians would intervene and keep the socialist regime in power. Like they did in Afghanistan.
    That would show the weakness of the west in confronting a socialist state.
    They were wrong and now it really shows.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 10 years, 9 months ago
    For decades now, Marxists have been unable and unwilling to explain their socialist failures (USSR, Nazi Germany, Cuba, Venezuela, et alia). Why would anyone expect them to report on another dreary addition to a lengthening dreary list?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ sjatkins 10 years, 9 months ago
    It is not that big of a deal as a story. Their leader thought that the best way out of the country's doldrums was to take the package offered by Russia. The people disagreed for good and bad reasons and blamed much of the country's problems on the current leader as they are inclined to do with or without reason. The country is consider a basket case in many ways and the West has been slow to offer them a better bailout deal. Many of the the people want to be part of EU. EU is loathe to take on another economy basket case that is also known for being one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

    I don't see all this so-called "revolution" of being of much real historic significance. Certainly I see no real reaching for a much sounder and better set of principles to base the country on. It seems like a lot of unrest for the sake of unrest.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo