By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
DIGITAL JOURNAL
March 29, 2026
Demonstrators are seen rallying in Los Angeles at a 'No Kings' protest in June 2025 -- and they will hit the streets again on October 18, 2025 - Copyright AFP/File ETIENNE LAURENT
The third No Kings rally in 14 months is bigger than ever.
The world agrees. There are even protests in Italy, France, Germany, the UK, and Portugal.
There’s even a No Kings in Puerto Rico, which someone called a “trash island” during the 2024 election.
There’s a reason for this, and it’s much deeper than just today or the last 10 years.
Americans in general don’t like American politics, and historically they rarely have. They don’t trust it. They all truly hate the ongoing horror story that the country has become. That’s getting on people’s nerves to an intolerable level. The one thing they don’t want to see is the absolute, total failure to address all issues.
This isn’t about ideology.
It’s about reality.
America isn’t yet a true has-been country, but you can see echoes from other former top dog countries. You also can’t avoid American nostalgia for a second. It’s everywhere. It condenses into “Things used to be great”. There’s a very sour, multi-generational taste in people’s mouths. America simply doesn’t like total failure, particularly in large doses.
The Trump administration is also pretty unpopular for a so-called “grassroots populist movement” even at the scripted-hicks level.
In no sense of the word is this administration anything like a real government. It’s a mess.
The purpose of government is to run countries, not destroy them.
A chronically sick, 95% broke, hyper overstressed country can’t be “great”.
Things are now definitely not “great” for those wondering, and they’re getting worse.
Failure can’t hide. Neither this administration nor the previous Trump administration can pretend to have delivered on any of its platforms. More priority is given to tax cuts for the rich than to any other issue. DOGE effectively gutted the Federal government. Tariffs have been a disaster, cranking up domestic prices while Americans struggle with daily expenses.
ICE is far less effective and far more expensive in its role than any other administration’s anti-illegal immigrant initiatives. Check any stats you can find. The FCC is a political muppet. The FAA is looking like an old theme park. Foreign affairs now consist of wars and very deeply offended trading partners and allies. Even food and water are big daily issues.
No Kings is simply calling it like it is.
America’s previously influential, now ridiculous mass media aren’t helping. Everything is downplayed. From mass layoffs to the sheer absurdity of replacing trained people with unreliable technologies, there’s a buzzword for everything, but no substance.
The No Kings rally got a response from FOX, which somehow managed to glue together some sad little coverage, calling it a communist plot. This recycled 1950s kitsch is pure McCarthyism, finding Reds Under Beds on a routine basis.
American media believes itself. Nobody else does. But if someone in American media says there are Reds Under Beds, there must be Reds Under Beds just because it says so.
As a matter of fact, the American socialist reaction would be called mainstream in any country on Earth but America. Definitely not “socialism” in any form.
The Constitution, when it was written, was one of the most advanced constitutions in history, and it still is in so many ways. Nobody else even thought of the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. They didn’t put it in their constitutions, either. America did. It was a sort of 1776 version of socialism before even the word socialism really existed. Inalienable rights were something new and truly revolutionary then.
The No Kings rallies are simply the Constitution at work.
_____________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
March 29, 2026
Demonstrators are seen rallying in Los Angeles at a 'No Kings' protest in June 2025 -- and they will hit the streets again on October 18, 2025 - Copyright AFP/File ETIENNE LAURENT
The third No Kings rally in 14 months is bigger than ever.
The world agrees. There are even protests in Italy, France, Germany, the UK, and Portugal.
There’s even a No Kings in Puerto Rico, which someone called a “trash island” during the 2024 election.
There’s a reason for this, and it’s much deeper than just today or the last 10 years.
Americans in general don’t like American politics, and historically they rarely have. They don’t trust it. They all truly hate the ongoing horror story that the country has become. That’s getting on people’s nerves to an intolerable level. The one thing they don’t want to see is the absolute, total failure to address all issues.
This isn’t about ideology.
It’s about reality.
America isn’t yet a true has-been country, but you can see echoes from other former top dog countries. You also can’t avoid American nostalgia for a second. It’s everywhere. It condenses into “Things used to be great”. There’s a very sour, multi-generational taste in people’s mouths. America simply doesn’t like total failure, particularly in large doses.
The Trump administration is also pretty unpopular for a so-called “grassroots populist movement” even at the scripted-hicks level.
In no sense of the word is this administration anything like a real government. It’s a mess.
The purpose of government is to run countries, not destroy them.
A chronically sick, 95% broke, hyper overstressed country can’t be “great”.
Things are now definitely not “great” for those wondering, and they’re getting worse.
Failure can’t hide. Neither this administration nor the previous Trump administration can pretend to have delivered on any of its platforms. More priority is given to tax cuts for the rich than to any other issue. DOGE effectively gutted the Federal government. Tariffs have been a disaster, cranking up domestic prices while Americans struggle with daily expenses.
ICE is far less effective and far more expensive in its role than any other administration’s anti-illegal immigrant initiatives. Check any stats you can find. The FCC is a political muppet. The FAA is looking like an old theme park. Foreign affairs now consist of wars and very deeply offended trading partners and allies. Even food and water are big daily issues.
No Kings is simply calling it like it is.
America’s previously influential, now ridiculous mass media aren’t helping. Everything is downplayed. From mass layoffs to the sheer absurdity of replacing trained people with unreliable technologies, there’s a buzzword for everything, but no substance.
The No Kings rally got a response from FOX, which somehow managed to glue together some sad little coverage, calling it a communist plot. This recycled 1950s kitsch is pure McCarthyism, finding Reds Under Beds on a routine basis.
American media believes itself. Nobody else does. But if someone in American media says there are Reds Under Beds, there must be Reds Under Beds just because it says so.
As a matter of fact, the American socialist reaction would be called mainstream in any country on Earth but America. Definitely not “socialism” in any form.
The Constitution, when it was written, was one of the most advanced constitutions in history, and it still is in so many ways. Nobody else even thought of the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. They didn’t put it in their constitutions, either. America did. It was a sort of 1776 version of socialism before even the word socialism really existed. Inalienable rights were something new and truly revolutionary then.
The No Kings rallies are simply the Constitution at work.
_____________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
Critics Blast ‘Clueless’ New York Times for Dismissive Coverage of Historic No Kings Protests
“The NY Times saves its harshest skepticism for progressives,” said one critic.
Protesters gather in Times Square during the ‘’No Kings’’ national day of protest in New York, United States, on March 28, 2026.
(Photo by Jerome Gilles/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Brad Reed
Mar 29, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
The New York Times is drawing criticism for publishing articles that downplayed the significance of Saturday’s No Kings protests, which initial estimates suggest was the largest protest event in US history.
In a Times article that drew particular ire, reporter Jeremy Peters questioned whether nationwide events that drew an estimated 8 million people to the streets “would be enough to influence the course of the nation’s politics.”
RECOMMENDED...
“Can the protests harness that energy and turn it into victories in the November midterm elections?” Peters asked rhetorically. “How can they avoid a primal scream that fades into a whimper?”
Journalist and author Mark Harris called Peters’ take on the protests “predictable” and said it was framed so that the protests would appear insignificant no matter how many people turned out.
“There’s a long, bad journalistic tradition,” noted Harris. “All conservative grass-roots political movements are fascinating heartland phenomena, all progressive grass-roots political movements are ineffectual bleating. This one is written off as powered by white female college grads—the wine-moms slur, basically.”
Media critic Dan Froomkin was event blunter in his criticism of the Peters piece.
“Putting anti-woke hack Jeremy Peters on this story is an act of war by the NYT against No Kings,” he wrote.
Mark Jacob, former metro editor at the Chicago Tribune, also took a hatchet to Peters’ analysis.
“The NY Times saves its harshest skepticism for progressives,” he wrote. “Instead of being impressed by 3,000-plus coordinated protests, NYT dismisses the value of ‘hitting a number’ and asks if No Kings will be ‘a primal scream that fades into a whimper.’ F off, NY Times. We’ll defeat fascism without you.”
The Media and Democracy Project slammed the Times for putting Peters’ analysis of the protests on its front page while burying straight news coverage of the events on page A18.
“NYT editors CHOSE that Jeremy Peters’s opinions would frame the No Kings demonstrations and pro-democracy movement to millions of NYT readers,” the group commented.
Joe Adalian, west coast editor for New York Mag’s Vulture, criticized a Times report on the No Kings demonstrations that quoted a “skeptic” of the protests without noting that said skeptic was the chairman of the Ole Miss College Republicans.
“Of course, the Times doesn’t ID him as such,” remarked Adalian. “He’s just a Concerned Youth.”
Jeff Jarvis, professor emeritus at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, took issue with a Times piece that offered five “takeaways” from the No Kings events that somehow managed to miss their broader significance.
“I despise the five-takeaways journalistic trope the Broken Times loves so,” Jarvis wrote. “It is reductionist, hubristic in its claim to summarize any complex event. This one leaves out much, like the defense of democracy against fascism.”
Journalist Miranda Spencer took stock of the Times’ entire coverage of the No Kings demonstrations and declared it “clueless,” while noting that USA Today did a far better job of communicating their significance to readers.
Harper’s Magazine contributing editor Scott Horton similarly argued that international news organizations were giving the No Kings events more substantive coverage than the Times.
“In Le Monde and dozens of serious newspapers around the world, prominent coverage of No Kings 3, which brought millions of Americans on to the streets to protest Trump,” Horton observed. “In NYT, an illiterate rant from Jeremy W Peters and no meaningful coverage of the protests. Something very strange going on here.”
“The NY Times saves its harshest skepticism for progressives,” said one critic.
Protesters gather in Times Square during the ‘’No Kings’’ national day of protest in New York, United States, on March 28, 2026.
(Photo by Jerome Gilles/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Brad Reed
Mar 29, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
The New York Times is drawing criticism for publishing articles that downplayed the significance of Saturday’s No Kings protests, which initial estimates suggest was the largest protest event in US history.
In a Times article that drew particular ire, reporter Jeremy Peters questioned whether nationwide events that drew an estimated 8 million people to the streets “would be enough to influence the course of the nation’s politics.”
RECOMMENDED...
“Can the protests harness that energy and turn it into victories in the November midterm elections?” Peters asked rhetorically. “How can they avoid a primal scream that fades into a whimper?”
Journalist and author Mark Harris called Peters’ take on the protests “predictable” and said it was framed so that the protests would appear insignificant no matter how many people turned out.
“There’s a long, bad journalistic tradition,” noted Harris. “All conservative grass-roots political movements are fascinating heartland phenomena, all progressive grass-roots political movements are ineffectual bleating. This one is written off as powered by white female college grads—the wine-moms slur, basically.”
Media critic Dan Froomkin was event blunter in his criticism of the Peters piece.
“Putting anti-woke hack Jeremy Peters on this story is an act of war by the NYT against No Kings,” he wrote.
Mark Jacob, former metro editor at the Chicago Tribune, also took a hatchet to Peters’ analysis.
“The NY Times saves its harshest skepticism for progressives,” he wrote. “Instead of being impressed by 3,000-plus coordinated protests, NYT dismisses the value of ‘hitting a number’ and asks if No Kings will be ‘a primal scream that fades into a whimper.’ F off, NY Times. We’ll defeat fascism without you.”
The Media and Democracy Project slammed the Times for putting Peters’ analysis of the protests on its front page while burying straight news coverage of the events on page A18.
“NYT editors CHOSE that Jeremy Peters’s opinions would frame the No Kings demonstrations and pro-democracy movement to millions of NYT readers,” the group commented.
Joe Adalian, west coast editor for New York Mag’s Vulture, criticized a Times report on the No Kings demonstrations that quoted a “skeptic” of the protests without noting that said skeptic was the chairman of the Ole Miss College Republicans.
“Of course, the Times doesn’t ID him as such,” remarked Adalian. “He’s just a Concerned Youth.”
Jeff Jarvis, professor emeritus at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, took issue with a Times piece that offered five “takeaways” from the No Kings events that somehow managed to miss their broader significance.
“I despise the five-takeaways journalistic trope the Broken Times loves so,” Jarvis wrote. “It is reductionist, hubristic in its claim to summarize any complex event. This one leaves out much, like the defense of democracy against fascism.”
Journalist Miranda Spencer took stock of the Times’ entire coverage of the No Kings demonstrations and declared it “clueless,” while noting that USA Today did a far better job of communicating their significance to readers.
Harper’s Magazine contributing editor Scott Horton similarly argued that international news organizations were giving the No Kings events more substantive coverage than the Times.
“In Le Monde and dozens of serious newspapers around the world, prominent coverage of No Kings 3, which brought millions of Americans on to the streets to protest Trump,” Horton observed. “In NYT, an illiterate rant from Jeremy W Peters and no meaningful coverage of the protests. Something very strange going on here.”
No comments:
Post a Comment