Sunday's gay rights rally on Capitol Hill garnered a positive story on the first page of Monday's New York Times National section by reporter Jeremy Peters, "New Generation of Gay Rights Advocates March to Put Pressure on the President." Peters claimed that "tens of thousands" had gathered on the West Lawn of the Capitol Sunday to prod Barack Obama to move more aggressively to promote greater equality for gays.
Unlike the paper's hostile coverage of the "tea party" and "9/12" rallies by anti-spending conservatives, the Times's relatively prominent (page A12) coverage of the gay rights rally displayed no hostility toward the beliefs of the protestors and didn't label them liberal, even though a photo slideshow at nytimes.com featured images of Socialist Worker party members marching in solidarity.
The only criticism the Times found came from some gay rights advocates, including Rep. Barney Frank, who argued the protest was a diversion of scarce resources that could have been plowed into ballot initiatives in Maine and Washington state. The Times also found the new breed of activists attacking Obama from the left for insufficient attention to their issues.
Impatient and discouraged by what they see as a certain detachment by President Obama on their issues, gay rights supporters took to the streets Sunday in the largest demonstration for gay rights here in nearly a decade.
The rally was primarily the undertaking of a new generation of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender advocates who have grown disillusioned with the movement's leadership.
Known as Stonewall 2.0 or the Prop. 8 Generation (a reference to the galvanizing effect that the repeal of California's same-sex marriage law had on many young people), these activists, in their 20s and 30s, are at odds with advocates urging patience as Mr. Obama grapples with other pieces of his domestic agenda like the health care overhaul and the economic recovery.
The Times claimed there were "tens of thousands on the west lawn of the Capitol."
But at the rally, some gave the speech low marks for lacking anything new and failing to acknowledge several major issues confronting the movement. In the words of Billie Myers, a musician who spoke to an eager crowd of tens of thousands on the west lawn of the Capitol, "I'm sorry, but I didn't like your speech."
The Times credulously reported over-optimistic estimates from organizers "saying that at least 150,000 people had attended" the march. That figure sounds quite high compared to estimates of 20,000 discussed on gay rights web sites.
By contrast, most observers put the numbers at the September 12 rally well into six figures. Yet the Times didn't quote any estimates of crowd size in its coverage of the conservative rally.
The organizers were rating the march a success, saying that at least 150,000 people had attended, though the authorities gave no official estimate of the crowd size.
The marchers included many who were not gay but attended to support gay friends.
—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
In other news, the sky is
October 12, 2009 - 15:56 ET by kefkaIn other news, the sky is blue and water is wet.
Why is this a surprise
October 12, 2009 - 16:01 ET by Thinking.ManYou have to be anally examined before working at the times, no Hetro's allowed.
If your a woman there is a different test, I will leave that one up to your imaginations.
The nutroots are already saying there were more people...
October 12, 2009 - 16:05 ET by R D Helmfor the gay march than for the Tea Party.
What a shock there.
-Dave
As far as protest turnout is
October 12, 2009 - 16:19 ET by bse5150As far as protest turnout is concerned, teaparty vs. gay protest, the nutroots can go fuck themselves. There is ample evidence on YouTube that there were not many gays protesting at all. And WAY WAY WAY fewer than the teaparty people. Stupid Leftists, everything, EVERYTHING with them is a goddamned lie, right from their boy in the White House on down.
Second post of yours bse5150
October 12, 2009 - 21:13 ET by general companyWith unnecessary language
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
http://www.c-span.or... I
October 12, 2009 - 18:30 ET by ctyankeehttp://www.c-span.or...
I watched some of the coverage on CSPAN (link above). One speaker was from the International Socialist Party but that's not left-wing, is it? ;)
Panoramic view of
October 12, 2009 - 16:18 ET by Six String SpiffPanoramic view of Washington DC TEA Party.
The gay protests had a lower head count than a bad concert of "The Cure"
Re Barney
October 12, 2009 - 16:56 ET by slickwillie2001The diss of the Gay Equality march from Barney Frank was special: "The only thing they're going to be putting pressure on is the grass." Imagine the hoo-ha had a Republican said that of the protesters.
My my!
October 12, 2009 - 17:08 ET by Seabeach4348I can't believe it. Twice in a month's time I was in agreement with two people I despise:
1) I agreed with Obozo that Kanye West is a jackass.
2) Now with Barney Frank of all people that the homo march was a non-starter and a waste of everyone's time. And that was indeed special.
Barak Hussein Obama
Ummm Umm Umm
The msm are Presstitutes of
October 12, 2009 - 19:11 ET by nadadhimmiThe msm are Presstitutes of the 1st order. It's common knowledge.
photoshop~~
October 12, 2009 - 19:54 ET by BKeyserFirst, this may not be safe for work.
That being said, I have to admit that I'm truly em-bare-assed about this one, but the look on Biden's face made it all worthwhile. And don't worry, I didn't have to touch up anything but the faces!
Now for context: There has been a fairly significant outcry from the LGBT community about Barry's failure thus far to end "Don't ask, don't tell" and the DOMA issues. Some even say that appointing Kevin Jennings may turn out to be another vetting issue that costs the administration rather than help to promote gay and lesbian issues. Well, we all know how this administration handles grievance, and this was no different. No way they would let this go without a full monty response.
Re photoshop
October 12, 2009 - 20:45 ET by slickwillie2001Perhaps your best work yet.
Thanks slick~~
October 12, 2009 - 20:54 ET by BKeyserlooks as though this one's heading down the memory hole though. Day late and a dollar short...
Where was Fox News wall to
October 12, 2009 - 22:09 ET by 24enakWhere was Fox News wall to wall promotion, and coverage of this rally?
24 yak yak, Fox probably didn't bother with wall-to-wall...
October 12, 2009 - 22:30 ET by R D Helm...coverage, as there really wasn't that many people there.
Even the gay sites are saying only about 20,000 showed up.
LOL-I am guessing that is about 50% more than actually did.
-Dave
Fox's total coverage of the
October 13, 2009 - 22:21 ET by 24enakFox's total coverage of the protest was 3:26 seconds, and they had to use ABC sat. feed, no cameras, or reporters even though they have a D.C. branch. Fox's coverage of a protest of the New Jersey school kids singing about Obama got a reporter live and 8:00 plus of coverage. How many people were their protesting during Fox's report? None. The protest was held before the FNC reporter got their. How can FNC bitch about the coverage of the TEA party protest when they don't even bother to send a reporter or a camera to "report" on the Gay rights protest. FNC is an absolute joke.