Every year I teach an extensive unit on the Holocaust. My students not only read Anne Frank and Elie Wiesel, but are immersed in a great deal of background information about an historical era of which many of them are, shockingly, ignorant. One depressing constant in my yearly teaching of this unit is that there is nearly always some current, real world parallel. This year it is Darfur.

Now, I always attempt to present the parallels to my students in as hopeful a manner as possible: “People are speaking out against this.” “They’re standing up for others.” “You can make a difference.” The recent arrest of five U.S. Congresspersons at the Sudanese embassy seemed tailor-made to send this message. Yet when I Googled the incident, I came up with a paltry handful of articles. Most were from foreign news services or regional media sources serving the constituency of the Congresspersons involved. No New York Times. No Wall Street Journal. No CNN.

It was appalling.

And more than that, it was disheartening. Could the 20th century’s most earthshaking revolutions have occurred in today’s media environment? Would India have shaken the British yoke if Mohandas K. Gandhi’s nonviolent efforts had not been covered by newspapers worldwide? Would the Civil Rights Movement have succeeded without sound clips of Dr. King’s moving speeches, or news footage of Bull Connor brutalizing peaceful protesters?

Social movements rely on public knowledge of inequities, atrocities, and the consequent campaigns to prevent or stop such things from happening. In order to effect real change, public outrage is an absolute necessity. But how can the public be outraged when they are uninformed and ignorant of what is going on in the world? When the media doesn’t cover the atrocity in depth or detail—as is the case in the often back-paged Darfur genocide—or when it fails to mention widespread opposition to government policies and actions—as the dearth of coverage given to the enormous antiwar rally in New York City illustrates—then can peaceful protest succeed?

I would never, ever advocate violence. Please do not read this as a call for such an un-evolved reaction to our current circumstances.

But how can the voice of the people change anything, if no one can hear it?