There was a big hoopla in the MSM over the Glenn Beck rally the other day. They seemed to want to make the main storyline about the size of the event. And, of course, most of them said the number was low, below 100,000. CBS even hired a group to do a "professional" estimate. As I said, I believe the MSM's main motive in all this was to turn attention away from the peaceful gathering and it's message.
[Update: They're still running with this angle: today the LA Times has an opinion piece--what else is there in that rag-- on Google News called "The Science of Crowds" which focuses on what they call Beck's "controversial rally." They even get into a little "mine's bigger than yours" with a reference to Obama's Inauguration rall. This all tells me they're still worried about the Tea Party movement and want to make sure they've done what they can to crush this sizeable manifestation of it.]
Since the "teabaggers" as they love to call them weren't foaming at the mouth and randomly attacking black people on the Mall, the MSM had to make the narrative about something else: its size. They used a low ball pitch, both visually and verbally, knowing that it would generate hostility among the conservative pundits and blogs. They pretty much succeeded in this and also in leaving those few misguided souls who still get all of their news from the MSM, with the impression that the event was not that well attended.
I was struck by the photos they used to support their contention of a low turnout. The following photo suggests that attendance at the Beck rally was light.
I found this, I believe, on Drudge. A little different perspective, dontcha think? [And I wonder if the "scientific" analysts in the LA Times article counted any people under all those shade trees on that hot day?]