President’s Day 2017
Every year we celebrate the former presidents
of our nation and all of the accomplishments they made. With Presidents Day
just passing last week, I thought the events in response to the holiday would
be interesting to take a look at. With Donald Trump as our president, there has
been a lot of backlash and protests. One of the most recent protests was on the
20th of February, aimed at Trump and was trending as “Not My
Presidents Day” on social media platforms. The articles I read took a look at
each point of view and gave insightful information about the protest events
held on Presidents day this year.
One of the first articles I came
across during my research on this topic was on CNN and titled 'Not My President's Day' protesters rally to
oppose Trump. In this article, several of the head protestors were
interviewed and asked about their concern of having Donald Trump as president
and why they were protesting. Most of the women just wanted to continue to make
a statement and get recognized by the media to show their distaste for
President Trump and the changes he is trying to make to this country. Olga
Lexell, one of the protestors who helped organize protests in Los Angelos,
Chicago, and New York, shares her opinion on Trump and lets the public know
where she stands by saying, "A lot of people are angry because he lost the
popular vote and is ruling like somebody who won by a landslide,". This
article is meant to reach and support the Liberals in attempt to connect and
support their beliefs in their distrust for Trump. The use of language from the
very beginning of this article already sets a negative connotation for Trump by
saying “another week, another series of demonstrations by opponents of
President Donald Trump”.
On the other hand, reading an
article from FOX news downplays the events and protests that happened on
Presidents Day this year. This article did provide the facts of what happened
on Monday, but made the efforts of the protestors sound very insignificant and
minor. This article was much shorter in length and gave the bare minimum of information.
The use of language again was an important factor of this article in showing
which side of the controversy Fox supports. Only one man was interviewed in
this article as opposed to the three women that were interviewed in the first
article that was in favor for the protests that I read. The lack of first-hand
information that was provided in this article makes it feel less passionate to
the reader, which in turn makes the reader not get as emotional involved and
care as much as someone who is reading the first article. Lastly, Fox takes one
more stab at the Trump protestors by making it a point to say, “Organizers
expect 14,000 demonstrators, but the numbers appeared only in the hundreds”,
and bring to light that their efforts were not as successful as they thought
they were.
Both articles that I researched and
analyzed provided accurate information about Trump and the protests that
happened in the beginning of the week, but they portray the protestors in
vastly different ways and their use of language is what sways the reader.
"'Not My President's Day' Protesters Rally to Oppose Trump." CNN. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2017.
"Protesters Hold 'Not My Presidents Day' Events across the US." Fox News. FOX News Network, n.d. Web. 24 Feb.
This election has produced an unprecedented amount of public protest. It is worth considering whether this degree of protest is because of the controversial nature or behavior of the new president; or because the fairly recent development of social network media makes it possible. The protests held on President's Day might be a good example of this.
ReplyDeleteOn the Saturday following the inauguration, there was a massive, global protest related to Trump's election. The event was impressive in both its scope and the relative peace that surrounded it. Due to its success, organizers seem to have become hopeful that the use of SNM to organize a rally WOULD result in world-wide action to match the world-wide attention to hashtags and twitter feeds. However, virtual protesting is easy and convenient, while physical protesting is much harder and requires much more commitment on the part of those doing it. So, the protests on Feb 20 were significantly smaller than those from January 21 - even though it seems very likely that public sentiment, especially from those inclined to protest this president, was the same.
Did coverage of these protests become a comparison to the earlier, more successful event? Did the supporters of the Feb protest imply that the movement was strong and consistent - even though fewer people showed up? Did critics of the Feb protest point to the dramatic drop in participation as evidence that the movement was weakening? Is it possible to assess the impact of the Feb protests outside of that context? Would you suggest that media friendly to the #resistance would want their coverage to reaffirm the patriotism and sincerity of the protesters, while media hostile to the same movement would continue to call into question its motives and goals?
Rather than focusing specifically on the protests from Feb 20, perhaps you might look at the ways different media outlets have described the public's reaction to the new president and his initiatives. This is a good start here. Please let me know how I can help!
There has been an incredible amount of backlash and protesting since the presidential campaign and even more so after the inauguration of president Trump. I think that these campaigns have been so significant and are able to happen and cause such a commotion is because of the use of social media. With this presidential election being one of the firsts that has been spread throughout social media so rapidly, I feel like a lot of opinions have been able to be discussed. It is no secret that there is a vast majority of people who express their distrust of President Trump though social media through tweets, hashtags, and even internet memes, were able to rally together in January on the day after his inauguration to protest his start in office. I think these protests were possible mainly because of the use of social media. There were protests in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angelos, etc. and were all in favor of the distrust and dissatisfaction of Trump in office. These protests were so large and successful because they were planned and discussed in advance. The “what if” Trump is actually elected as our new president was streaming around the twitter feed for months in advance to his actual election. People knew that when he was inaugurated, they wanted to practice their first amendment right and protest what they felt was unfair. Without the use of social media, I do not believe that these protests would have received worldwide recognition. The goal of these protests was to share the opinion and let the rest of the world know that a good portion of America is certainly unhappy and shocked by the election of Trump. Without twitter and Facebook I do not think these protests would have been so successful in numbers and in recognition worldwide. On the other hand, the protests in February after president’s day did not receive as much attention from the public as the protests in January. This is due to the lack of preparation of spreading the word fast enough through the internet. With the protests following the inauguration, it was planned months in advanced and was well thought out because it had a lot of time and ideas behind it. I feel like the “Not my President’s Day” protests were less thought and the idea of it was thrown together a lot quicker than the inauguration protests. People probably felt that since the Women’s March in January was so successful that people would drop what they’re doing to protest President’s day too in the same way they protested a month earlier. This was also not a great assumption of the people who organized February protests because again people knew so far in advance to take off of work for the day or to do what they had to do in order to get to the protests in January, and they just did not have the luxury of having that time of knowing in February. I still think that the February protests were successful in that they gained national recognition and were covered by multiple news outlets, I just do not believe the protests were as popular because of the lack of the use of social media and the short amount of time that was given for the preparation of these protests.
DeleteYou do a pretty nice job of summarizing many of the talking points from those concerned enough to protest the Trump presidency. Be careful of how your own political sympathies can impact your writing - it is inaccurate to state the a "vast majority of people" in this country distrust this president. It is true, however, that a large majority of voters in those major cities: New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle, etc. were not supporters of Mr. Trump. Would you suggest that a protest march in New York or Los Angeles is indicative of the attitude of the entire country? When it is described that way, would you call it a fact?
ReplyDeleteYou spend a lot of effort in this post suggesting reasons why the second march was less prominent than the first - specifically that there was less time to coordinate through social media. Is it possible that fewer people were inclined to attend for other reasons?
But debating whether these protests were "successful" or not is not the goal of your paper. Instead, pay closer attention to the ways such protests are being described by the popular media - how the varied narratives about these protests are slowing becoming a part of the larger public opinion.
Remember, our goal here is to objectively analyze persuasive technique as observed within public discourse. You have a good area to explore - but don't participate in the debate. Instead, try to remain objective. Let me know how I can help!