The Media and War OR: Selling What's Popular

 After investigating the provided sites and seeing just how adamant the voices involved were on their antiwar stance, I did find it very curious that I had never heard of these sites before. It seems that the media only runs stories about war in-progress or war about to be, and these topics seem like they should be against the views of the general public. 

I think the reason for this discrepancy is that topics like war are incendiary when debated and discussed, whether online, in the news or in person. News sites, especially popular ones, use these controversial topics to drum up viewer and reader numbers and to spark arguments among their audience. Controversy sells, and these news sites know it so they utilize the outrage sparked by their content to keep people's eyes on them and not straying to less well known sites that actively campaign against war and violence. 

This is a phenomena that can be seen in other topics as well, such as the news choosing to focus only on the violent protests taking place under BLM symbols, and failing to showcase the entirely peaceful ones that are also taking place. It's easy to get views by making people mad, and these news sites have it down to an art.

While some sources, like local news stations or specifically focused news sites like the antiwar ones focus on sharing both sides of the argument, you rarely ever see it in the mainstream for that simple reason: It doesn’t sell as well.