US Media Discovers Peril of Protesting, Only When It's Not Domestically Sponsored
RT reports a truck plowed through anti-Iran government protesters in Los Angeles. The incident is framed as a shocking act of aggression against those seeking change. Meanwhile, in the US, similar vehicle attacks on domestic protesters—environmental activists, racial justice advocates—often elicit a different media treatment, sometimes downplaying the severity or questioning the protesters' right
to be in the road. One might almost infer that a protest gains moral legitimacy by the identity of its alleged foreign sponsors. It's almost as if some protests are 'good' protests, deserving of protection and media sympathy, while others are 'bad' protests, whose participants arguably 'get what they deserve' for inconveniencing traffic. Remember when peaceful climate activists were labeled
'extremists' for blocking a highway, only for their plight to be overshadowed by calls for heavier penalties, not deeper analysis of their grievances? The selective outrage machine is a well-oiled engine, especially when the narrative serves to destabilize a foreign adversary.