I'm shocked at the lack of MSM coverage of Egypt

[OKDem08]

The only thing I have seen on MSM is merely cursory at best. I was thinking earlier about why this is. Could it be that these circumstances don't fit well into a pre-determined narrative? How dare we be allowed to consider the circumstances of and empathize with the travails of a Muslim state?

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. We only have basic cable - PBS Newshour has been covering it quite well, we think.

We tossed CNNMSNBCYounameit under the bus years ago. And we expect little to nothing except Pharma ads from CBSABCNBC, so stopped watching them as well.

[1896educational]

18. I agree

There are many big stories that get lost completely, but this one is getting covered. I don't expect the MSM to drop their Oscars, Bachmann, Jersey Shore nonsense any time soon, but still they are many serious organizations out there covered Egypt.

[customerserviceguy]

2. Does it matter what happens there?

Every time there's a change of government, the words of "The Who" run through my brain: "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..."

What changes could possibly take place in Egypt that would be a step in the right direction towards world peace? We bought off Egypt with the Camp David accords, and they're staying bought off. Could we be assured that a new government would do the same?

If not, prepare for the price of oil to rise to new heights, which should choke off recovery in the whole world. It happened that way in 1973.

[EFerrari]

6. Much better our recovery be choked off by our own Wall Street

and not by a bunch of foreigners.

[customerserviceguy]

11. The Wall Streeters want a recovery, too

they always profit handsomely from them.

In any case, can you be assured that any new government replacing Mubarak will keep Egypt as peaceful as it's been since 1973? That's gotta be worth something.

[Lorien]

22. Wall street believes that's what's good for Wall Street is bad for Main Street

and they believe that's just fine and dandy. Their ideas about "recovery" don't include the rest of us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Would a second Muslim government, be more to your liking?

No, the Muslim brotherhood is not as powerful as it is used for propaganda... but as distant as that is (according to experts) would that be better for world peace? (no, not really)

Mubarak is quite bad for human rights. Perhaps a MORE democratic system would work for most folks in Egypt, and incidentally world peace.

Problem is that you are reflecting a classic reason why the modern media no longer covers it... our provincialism.

[customerserviceguy]

13. Absolutely not

Whenever religious extremists are in power in a government, it's worse for everybody concerned, both citizens and neighbors.

As far as democracy in a predominantly Muslim nation (except Turkey) is concerned, I'll believe it is possible if this whole Iraq thing works out that way. My guess is that as soon as we leave (except for embassy staff and such) the place is going to look like Vietnam, 1975.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Well perhaps Egypt will surprise all of us,

and regardless, chances are this will work and Mubarak will live the rest of his days in London. So I hope that the successor government is NOT the muslim brotherhood. According to an Egyptian Novelist, who is familiar with Egypt, chances are this will be a democratic revolution... which may not be what we, or Tel Aviv wants. But, not exactly the Muslim Brotherhood taking over.

I am not very familiar with Egyptian politics so I paid attention to the interview this morning.

[Turborama]

16. It matters a lot to Egyptians and should matter to anyone who has empathy for other humans

Also, look at a map and see who Egypt's neighbors are.

[customerserviceguy]

23. And in their 6,000 years of history

when have they ever had any form of government than a totalitarian one? For that matter, other than Turkey (which wanted to be seen as "European") when has any form of democratic government worked in an Islamic land?

Oh, yes, I'm quite aware of a nuclear-armed nation on Egypt's border. Netanyahu's trigger finger must be getting mighty itchy these days. Israel hasn't had to stay on too much of a war footing in regards to Egypt ever since the Camp David accords.

Are there any guarantees that a post-Mubarak government will keep the peace that US taxpayers have bought and paid for for the last thirty years?

[Lorien]

20. Yes, it does. The people there are suffering terribly

they want real democracy and change, and they should have something better than a US backed dictatorship and nonstop martial law.

[customerserviceguy]

25. They're likely to wind up with

a religiously-backed dictatorship.

Remember Iran? Yeah, the Shah was a bad guy, but the Iranian mullahs killed more people in two years than Savak did in the previous twenty. Now, three decades later, we have a religiously-run state that both denies basic freedoms to its people, and is going whole-hog into developing nuclear weapons.

[WinkyDink]

33. There is no exiled Imam here; there IS a Nobel Peace-Prize winner.

[customerserviceguy]

34. We'll see how that works out

Besides, both Yassir Arafat and Henry Kissinger were Nobel peace prize winners, too. It really doesn't mean that much anymore.

[WinkyDink]

30. Well, gee, let's see... Democracy for EGYPTIANS?

[scarletwoman]

3. I don't have TV, so I have no way of judging. NPR has been covering it.

In any case, it's really quite simply -- the Egyptian government is our friend, therefore it's quite inconvenient to report the the people of Egypt aren't happy with their government.

And that which is inconvenient does not get reported.

[DJ13]

4. Riots and citizens taking on their government arent images the elites here want us to consider

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. For that turn to the BBC... a few shows on...

NPR... the ones co-written wiht the BBC... or news hour.

No, it does not meet a narrative, and also our nooz, partly by design, do not have foreign bureaus any longer.

[Odin2005]

7. I'm not shocked. Mubarak is US-backed.

[killbotfactory]

9. The media only does in-depth reports of tea party protests.

People rising up against a dictator? Meh.

[JVS]

10. I'm not.

Egypts current government is the possible egyptian government that America's PTB like best.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. What do you mean by MSM, exactly?

I watched tons about it on TV, which is fairly MS in and of itself. If you mean cable, they have no means to cover such stories, no ability to write them, and no interest in doing so, as they exist to make money. Journalism is expensive. Those are opinion channels. They don't do news as such. You should not expect to find it there.

[Ruby the Liberal]

15. Lebanon is about to implode as well.

Hezbollah just took over the government in a quasi-coup.

Nothing in the MSM about that either. Just a focus on Tunesia.

[Uzybone]

17. Really? You are SHOCKED that the MSM has failed to appropriately cover a story?

Are you an American?

[Lorien]

19. I don't watch the MSM, but I did explain what was going on to a heavy MSM viewer today

the powers that be don't want any of us getting any ideas. I truly hope that the Egyptian people prevail and that Mubarak steps down soon. It would send a message that's desperately needed.

[TreasonousBastard]

21. You are making the common mistake of thinking the media...

you watch is mainstream. I assume that's cable news, where the highest viewership is a small percentage of network news viewership.

Egypt has been quite adequately covered by the NY Times, PBS, NPR, and presumably other major news organs where I might have missed something. I even saw something about it on my local CBS news at 11 between the snow alerts. Do you mean on something more mainstream than the Times or Channel 2?

Even Tunisia got a mention in today's Times. Remember Tunisia? Something happened there, too.

[JoePhilly]

24. MSNBC has it going uninterrupted. You don't have MSNBC?

[bigwillq]

26. I've seen some good coverage of it.

Local news, cable news.

[Pisces]

27. Are you blind, it is on nonstop on MSNBC. The blogs are all over it. Go to Andrew Sullivans site.

[deutsey]

28. Al Jazeera's coverage was amazing

:applause:

[Rex]

29. The M$M is a completely political organization now. They cover

the news the US govt wants them to cover. Same as the last decade covering (up) GWB, Rummy, Cheney and the other criminals still out there and as guilty as sin. Egypt doesn't fall into the pattern they want to convey for their paymasters. At least not right now, give it a few weeks and if things get ugly (war, death, rape) the M$M will have NON STOP coverage - why? That kind of stuff makes them ratings/money and that is the bottom line for the M$M.

[MrCoffee]

31. Really? Shock? I'd be shocked if they were covering it.

[cali]

32. huh? CNN has had wall to wall coverage.

[brooklynite]

35. OP's like this annoy me...

They rarely mention what their definition of MSM media is (newspapers? Network news? CABLE network news?) and they also tend to fail to describe what proper reporting should consist of (in this case, reporting that protests are occurring at all? Or providing in-depth analysis of the underlying reasons for the protests?)

As for my answer, no, they're not "ignoring" the story, and no, there's no desire to stant the story to support geopolitical policies.