"Red Shirted'

American journalist love to romanticize the plight of protesters and uprisings in other countries. We love the idea of the meek coming together to triumph over the large and mighty. It might be a small protest or a riot, but we don't care, we eat it up regardless. So how do journalist manage to do this... depends on who you talk to. I looked at two stories covering the Red Shirt movement in Thailand and the political overthrow in Kyrgyzstan and analyzed the slant that was present against the existing governments in favor of the opposition.

Red Shirts in Bangkok

The New York Times covered the protest in Thailand, where protesters blocked access to the cities commercial districts. These protesters that came from the poorer, rural areas of Thailand were calling for the government to dissolve parliament. In their coverage they have quotes from four people: Nitipong, a protester; Mr. Abhisit, the prime minister; Kasit Piromya, the current foreign minister involved in the protests; and Samai Suporn, and older protester. There was one other silent source, Nan.

All of these sources made the protests seem diverse. They quote a government official, two college graduates, one a chemist and the other a computer salesman, and a poor rural farm woman. Doing this allows the reader to connect with the protesters.

The New York Times never speaks to a Bangkok resident affected by the protests. That is the third dimension that we are missing. The story paints the government in a very negative light. the prime minister's quotes makes it seem as if the government doesn't care about the citizens. If the story had a quote from a disgruntled Bangkok citizen, they would be more inclined to side with the government. The protesters are comparable to union workers slowing things down.

Nitipong- "There's not a jail big enough to fit us all"
The New York Times made it a point to say he didn't give his full name for fear of government retribution... When we think of "government retribution" our minds instantly jump to the most extreme forms of political repression, i.e. gulags. This is the first quote of the story and it makes the protesters seem heroic.

Kasit Piromya- "It was a lot of fun"
The current foreign minister was joining in during the protest. In my mind, she would be considered the former foreign minister... She has obviously abandoned her governmental duties.

Samai Suporn- "I'm not jealous of the rich"
On thing I don't understand about this story is how the New York Times protects its sources. You would think they would conceal the last name of everyone at the protest. Samai is a 50-year-old rice farmer from Northeast Thailand. As the protest leaders try to make this a class war issue, she says the exact opposite. Why would the Times include this? I would guess that "class warfare" insinuates a move towards communism and we all know how much America hates communists. She provides a good balance to the story. Even though the movement consists of mostly poor people, she is the only poor person represented.

Abhisit Vejjajiva- "legal proceedings and prosecution"
Somehow the article makes Mr. Abhisit seem like the bad guy. He just trying to keep the situation from blowing out of control (He doesn't have control either way). He is taking a nonviolent approach to handle this situation. the report writes that he "vowed" legal proceedings and prosecution. vow adds an extra charge to his statements.

Nan- Silent Source
Nan is a female protester that is a chemist that received a master's degree from Chulalongkorn University. She declined to provide her name... but why should she even be included in the story? She doesn't have a speaking part.

Coup d'etat in Kyrgyzstan

An overthrow of the government took place in Kyrgyzstan leaving 40 people dead and nearly 400 wounded. The story has three quotes... all from opposition leaders. None of the wounded were quoted. Maybe they refused to comment for fear of retaliation. Maybe the New York Times didn't seek a quote from them. Either way, the first quote of the story is "Power is now in the hands of the people's government" from Roza Otunbayeva, a figure for the opposition.

Police fired into the crowd
The police fired live ammunition into the crowd... so the story goes. No police are quoted. The picture on the front page is a group of police officers huddled behind shields as they are being decimated by rocks! How is the first story the only one that got through? the only quote about the actual violence comes from a human rights activist against the government. I'm sure this story has much more to be told.

Final Thoughts
As Americans, we have no idea about the political situation in either of these countries, but the slant of the stories makes the protesters seem like they are on the right side of the issue. the entire conflict in Kyrgyzstan is viewed through one set of sources that make the government seem as if they killed all 40 victims. Imagine if we were looking at our own country with thousands of Tea Party members protesting the idea of universal health care. Even though the world (all the developed parts of it) regard universal health care as a given, we would still assume the protesters are on the right side of the issue because we believe no one would protest a good idea. We, in America, are predisposed to hate government interference with our lives. In our minds (and our newspapers) less government is better, even if it has to be destroyed. In both of these stories, we never get to hear the government speak on the issue directly to the press.