Occupy Wall Street - Media Balckout & Police Brutatility

Daithi 1

Big mainstream media blackout of Occupy Wall Street ... Lets hope the crowds grow larger !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7XJ1UKKBpM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_7rZbVerlI

On September 22nd, 2011, sixteen cities from around the country and the world stood in solidarity with us, protesting the disparity of power and wealth that exists in our society. In Liberty Square, no such disparity exists. Everyone's needs are taken care for, food, medicine, water. The only need, the only right, that we cannot take care of is shelter, though this is not our choice. Mayor Bloomberg said that he would give us a space to protest but at every moment he attempts to erode us. He uses absurd police tactics – arresting protesters for using chalk on sidewalks, for wearing masks on the back of their heads in violation of a law that is a century and a half old, for... what, exactly? He uses the tactics of media suppression only available to a billionaire with a media empire. It has not worked. It will not work. We are growing. Each day more cities join us. Each day our movement grows. We demand real change. We will see it.

https://occupywallst.org/article/a-message-from-occupied-wall-street-day-six/

Daithi 1

Some media exposure here... but just to discuss the lack of media exposure :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaXBWpN7ii8

squod

Was on the journal.ie this morning. Could also have read it somewhere else. Hardly a blackout.

Daithi 1

squod wrote: »

Was on the journal.ie this morning. Could also have read it somewhere else. Hardly a blackout.

And yet, there are some guys in mainstream media stating there is a media blackout.

Perhaps I should have been more specific, there is/was a media in the U.S, not Ireland.

Is that ok ?

Daithi 1

Now do you believe me ?:rolleyes:

You'd think it would have made the traffic reports !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSn-IgwQAGY

Jonny7

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Big mainstream media blackout of Occupy Wall Street ... Lets hope the crowds grow larger !!

I read about it on mainstream news sites - it was pretty small in fairness.

Many other protests going on around the world didn't get the attention this did.

Daithi 1

Whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIJAZ90Dk8o

Daithi 1

Sly cop trying to rile up the crowd, using mace.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ05rWx1pig

studiorat

Was in last weeks New York times. Beautiful quote from one of the protestors :

“I want to get rid of the combustion engine,” John McKibben, an activist from Vermont, declared as his primary ambition.

The whole episode seemed to have no focus at all, having a variety of issues to protest against, war, the death penalty. Shame really.

One day, a trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, Adam Sarzen, a decade or so older than many of the protesters, came to Zuccotti Park seemingly just to shake his head. “Look at these kids, sitting here with their Apple computers,” he said. “Apple, one of the biggest monopolies in the world. It trades at $400 a share. Do they even know that?”

The Anonymous group posted some police details up of some of the police involved with the protests including their name phone number and family details. Apparently the police's families are fair game now.

Daithi 1

Whats your point ?

jackiebaron

Jonny7 wrote: »

I read about it on mainstream news sites - it was pretty small in fairness.

Many other protests going on around the world didn't get the attention this did.

What AMERICAN "mainstream sites"?

I have multiple friends who live in Gramercy, Canarsie, Middle village, Rego Park, Hoboken, NoHo and many other areas in NY/NJ and a week after this caper started they still had no clue it was going on. I sent them links and footage and these aren't the kind of people who just fart around on their couches and ignore the world.

Strange how a fücking chipmunk or a squirrel scampering around the pitch at Shea Stadium can make the 10 o'clock news but a bunch of girls getting "kettled" and maced by the NYPD on Wall Street is blacked out.

jackiebaron

studiorat wrote: »

Was in last weeks New York times. Beautiful quote from one of the protestors :



The whole episode seemed to have no focus at all, having a variety of issues to protest against, war, the death penalty. Shame really.



The Anonymous group posted some police details up of some of the police involved with the protests including their name phone number and family details. Apparently the police's families are fair game now.

So some (or many) of them had fücking phones.

That logic is akin to ...... Jesus this is flabbergasting..... saying "Many of these people have clothes on their backs! Don't they realise that what they're wearing is a product of the toil of so many??" It's like saying...."My GOD! these people in the streets had SPOONS peacefully eating their homemade soup!! Don't they realise that Krupp Steel or Sheffield Industries made those very spoons!!" How dare these vermin demand a level playing field!!!

"Dammit, I even saw some confounded scoundrel have the audacity to ask for a glass of water after he'd been bludgeoned. Doesn't this rat realise that he has to pay for water. Should have thrashed him to death, the varlet scum!"

jackiebaron

studiorat wrote: »

Was in last weeks New York times. Beautiful quote from one of the protestors :



The whole episode seemed to have no focus at all, having a variety of issues to protest against, war, the death penalty. Shame really.



The Anonymous group posted some police details up of some of the police involved with the protests including their name phone number and family details. Apparently the police's families are fair game now.

I suppose, in all honesty, studiorat, what most people would like to know is when is it acceptable to protest and petition one's government....but more importantly....in your opinion ... when is it completely unacceptable?

Next question....and they're quite straightforward....if the US Constitution validates and protects redress, free speech and free assembly then when (again in your opinion) can that right be quashed, ignored or violated?

When is it acceptable for an agent of the government to assault a citizen and what are the benchmark criteria for this departure from the rights of a citizenry?

Because, you see, I've seen the blinkered, cowardly arguments from people like you starting when the protest is quite chaotic. For example, a group will completely kick off and smash up the place as a result of maybe police brutality or corruption or something else....and people like you will come out and say "scum....hang 'em high! no respect for the rule of law." Then the next demo will be something a little less inflammatory like maybe students demonstrating peacefully and stopping traffic to get their point across about maybe a farm run locally that's exploiting workers or polluting the local water and they get smashed off the streets by night-stick wielding lunatics and your response is "commie, tree-hugging fags...deserve all they get".

Then maybe a march goes forth to bring attention to steroids that are being pumped into the burgers that your kids are being fed at school and you call them another bunch of upstarts who should know their place.

What it must be like to have absolutely no backbone is unfathomable.

You really should save all your postings for your sons. Show them how to be conscientious, independent free-thinkers.


"Here you go son. This is the only philosophy you need to get ahead in life. Go with the flow. Support the authorities no matter what they do and remember....always kiss ass. If you see a person getting beaten to pulp or raped by someone in a uniform, go along with it. Cheer it. You'll be rewarded."

studiorat

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Whats your point ?

Apart from the media blackout myth, 3 days in it made the Washington Times. My point is they seem to be big on catch phrases but lacking substance, demands. I believe they are in danger of diluting the effectiveness of their work. No concrete set of objectives as yet. They seem to range from re-introducing trade tariffs to opening all national borders to everyone! Immediate closing down all nuclear power plants and spending trillions of dollars on infrastructure all at the same time. Practically a "year zero" senario, and full of contradictions.

Protesting greed and corruption, while commendable, is pointless, without an definition and rational objectives you may as well be protesting against sin. Or trying to surround China!!

I also think that dragging innocent people into the situation and placing them in danger by publishing their details, regardless of what other family members may have done is pretty low.

Daithi 1

studiorat wrote: »

Apart from the media blackout myth, 3 days in it made the Washington Times. My point is they seem to be big on catch phrases but lacking substance, demands. I believe they are in danger of diluting the effectiveness of their work. No concrete set of objectives as yet. They seem to range from re-introducing trade tariffs to opening all national borders to everyone! Immediate closing down all nuclear power plants and spending trillions of dollars on infrastructure all at the same time. Practically a "year zero" senario, and full of contradictions.

Protesting greed and corruption, while commendable, is pointless, without an definition and rational objectives you may as well be protesting against sin. Or trying to surround China!!

They are individuals, they are bound to have different opinions and objectives. I think generally all are unhappy with big Government and the "profit before people" mentality in the U.S and worldwide.
If you agree that it is commendable, then act like it. You're nitpicking over weather the was a media blackout or not, and there clearly was.

studiorat wrote: »

I also think that dragging innocent people into the situation and placing them in danger by publishing their details, regardless of what other family members may have done is pretty low.

Are these protesters not innocent too ? They have a right to assemble and should feel safe in doing so without being battered, maced and corralled like a herd of animals by those who took an oath to protect them.
Perhaps now some of these police will think twice before reaching for their batons and mace cans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP2LREhJH4U

Yahoo Censors Emails About Wallstreet Protests

Thinking about e-mailing your friends and neighbors about the protests against Wall Street happening right now? If you have a Yahoo e-mail account, think again. ThinkProgress has reviewed claims that Yahoo is censoring e-mails relating to the protest and found that after several attempts on multiple accounts, we too were prevented from sending messages about the “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrations.

Over the weekend, thousands gathered for a “Tahrir Square”-style protest of Wall Street’s domination of American politics. The protesters, organized online and by organizations like Adbusters, have called their effort “Occupy Wall Street” and have set up the website: www.OccupyWallSt.org. However, several YouTube users posted videos of themselves trying to email a message inviting their friends to visit the Occupy Wall St campaign website, only to be blocked repeatedly by Yahoo. View a video of ThinkProgress making the attempt with the same blocked message experienced by others (click full screen for a better view of the text):

http://www.governamerica.com/dailydialectic.php?subaction=showcomments&id=1316563618&archive=&start_from=&ucat=&

Occupy Wall Street’s first media problem was that there was no media. On September 21, Keith Olbermann chastised New York newspapers and major news outlets for ignoring the demonstrations in their first five days.

http://www.observer.com/2011/09/occupy-wall-streets-media-problems/

Big media's shameful news brownout on the Wall Street protests.

What do you think was running in the pro-government, pro-Mubarek newspapers in Egypt back in February, when crowds of unhappy and often un- or under-employed citizens began crowding into Tahrir Square? I don't know the answer to that, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say there probably wasn't a lot of coverage of what was happening in Tahrir Square, at least at first. They were probably running cute feature stories about an old-time falafel stand in a changing Cairo neighborhood, or maybe articles on parking problems at the Great Pyramids. They certainly weren't going to call attention to the elephant in the room that was about to knock over a corrupt and decadent society.
I was thinking about that this week, during the extra time I had on my hands because I wasn't reading in the pages of the New York Times or the Washington Post about the Wall Street protests that have been going on now for four days, with hundreds of disenchanted and disaffected youth camping out nightly in a lower Manhattan park, marching on the financial district by day, getting arrested and provoking a large police presence including a phalanx of NYPD cops guarding the notorious Merrill Lynch bronze idol of greed.
Call me crazy, but as a journalist marking his 30th anniversary in the news business this year, I would think that an ongoing protest like that in my hometown would at least make the local newspaper. Not necessarily on Page 1, and not even every day necessarily. But at least wedged somewhere between the various ads for Tiffany and Saks, etc.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Big-media-s-shameful-news-by-Will-Bunch-110921-694.html

The list goes on.

studiorat

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Are these protesters not innocent too ?

Not if they choose to use the tactic of exposing the family members to harm, which they have. Then they are no better or worse then the police themselves.

Looks like they are calling blackout because the news coverage is showing it up for a farce. They aren't getting the coverage they want so they call foul. It's basically a "anti-capitalist" demo, they happen everywhere. The news paper covers it here and there and to keep the momentum going the protestors call "media black-out" when the news dies down.

Why are they so hung up on getting "main stream" media coverage in the first place? They don't "trust" it anyway.

Which as an aside is strange, do people want to be spoon fed the same coverage of events from every outlet?

Daithi 1

studiorat wrote: »

Not if they choose to use the tactic of exposing the family members to harm, which they have. Then they are no better or worse then the police themselves.

The police resorted to dirty tactics first. I think it was a good move to publish the details, now they can be held accountable or at least the is a threat of being held accountable on some level.

studiorat wrote: »

Looks like they are calling blackout because the news coverage is showing it up for a farce. They aren't getting the coverage they want so they call foul. It's basically a "anti-capitalist" demo, they happen everywhere. The news paper covers it here and there and to keep the momentum going the protestors call "media black-out" when the news dies down.

No it doesnt. I looks like there was a media blackout. When the protest didn't get the coverage they called foul because it was foul play, dirty tactics as usual.

studiorat wrote: »

Why are they so hung up on getting "main stream" media coverage in the first place? They don't "trust" it anyway.

Because they want the word to spread and finally it is spreading finally. Fresh protests are setting up around the Country. The media blackout has backfired.

studiorat wrote: »

Which as an aside is strange, do people want to be spoon fed the same coverage of events from every outlet?

People are always "spoonfed" the same crap from the same media outlets. When it's media that people actually WANT spread, it doesn't happen. It's not to much to ask for some media coverage.

After all, what they are doing is "commendable", surely that's news worthy ?

Daithi 1

Identified: NYPD Officer Who Maced Peaceful Protesters






A photographer has identified the cruel and cowardly NYPD supervisor who point blank maced a penned in group of young women and then slinks away Saturday at the Occupy Wall Street protests:
Deputy Inspector Anthony V. Bologna of the NYPD Patrol Borough Manhattan South.

TAKE ACTION
If you think Deputy Inspector Bologna should be fired and prosecuted for his abuse of power, file an on-line complaint with:

• Mayor Michael Bloomberg: http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mayor.html
• and, NYPD Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly: http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mailnypd.html
• and, the NYC Civilian Complaint Review Board: https://www.nyc.gov/html/ccrb/html/complaint.html

UPDATED: The Guardian is reporting tonight that Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna also stands accused of false arrest and civil rights violations in a claim brought by a protester involved in the 2004 demonstrations at the Republican National Convention.

Then, 1,800 people were arrested during protests against the Iraq war and the policies of president George W Bush. Alan Levine, a civil rights lawyer representing a protester at the event, told the Guardian that he filed an action against Bologna and another officer in 2007. The case is expected to be heard next year.




Photo/ http://davidscameracraft.blogspot.com




Photo/ http://www.thevillager.com/villager_113/afteryearsoftrouble.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ05rWx1pig

Daithi 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCiWN051mM4

humanji

Daithi 1 wrote: »

The police resorted to dirty tactics first. I think it was a good move to publish the details, now they can be held accountable or at least the is a threat of being held accountable on some level.

That's one of the more disgusting things I've read online. You genuinely think it's ok to put this mans family in danger because of his actions?

No it doesnt. I looks like there was a media blackout. When the protest didn't get the coverage they called foul because it was foul play, dirty tactics as usual.

It doesn't really look like a media blackout when the media is covering it though. To begin with it was another protest, of which there are hundreds happening across the states every year. As pointed out above, there didn't seem to be any one agenda. So if nobody knows what they're protesting about, why would any media outlet bother covering it?

It's not surprising in the least that it only gets media attention when the cops go overboard and start attacking people. THAT is news. It's what people want to hear about. Few care about yet another protest, so media outlets with an interest in their viewers/readers/listeners won't waste too much valuable time on something that will bore their customers.

Because they want the word to spread and finally it is spreading finally. Fresh protests are setting up around the Country. The media blackout has backfired.

But you're missing the point. If people can't trust what the media reports, why would they trust the media reporting on this? Isn't it a contradiction? And lets be honest, the majority of people watching mainstream media couldn't give a toss about the protest. They might watch a few seconds and then change the channel. Those with an interest in it would generally seek out information instead of waiting for it to be shown to them.

People are always "spoonfed" the same crap from the same media outlets. When it's media that people actually WANT spread, it doesn't happen. It's not to much to ask for some media coverage.

After all, what they are doing is "commendable", surely that's news worthy ?

News is a business. What is shown is what will get people watching, reading or listening. The more people doing this, the more profits are made. Reporting on something that continually happens will make people lose interest and the profits will lesson. That's why major world events are hyped to begin with and taper off soon afterwards even though they're ongoing (the reactor in Japan is a perfect example).

Ironically enough, the only way the above protesters seem likely to achieve anything is if they get beaten by the cops. That gets coverage. But other than that, they're disorganised and won't achieve much until they get it together and properly take on the challenge.

Daithi 1

humanji wrote: »

That's one of the more disgusting things I've read online. You genuinely think it's ok to put this mans family in danger because of his actions?

Yet it's just the run of the mill when cops beat up innocent protesters ?
These are family members too, with mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, kids etc. Nobody is saying the NYPD's actions are disgusting.
If the NYPD acted accordingly as they should, they would have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.
Play with fire and you get burned, treat folk the way you expect to be treated yada yada

humanji wrote: »

It doesn't really look like a media blackout when the media is covering it though. To begin with it was another protest, of which there are hundreds happening across the states every year. As pointed out above, there didn't seem to be any one agenda. So if nobody knows what they're protesting about, why would any media outlet bother covering it?

It's not surprising in the least that it only gets media attention when the cops go overboard and start attacking people. THAT is news. It's what people want to hear about. Few care about yet another protest, so media outlets with an interest in their viewers/readers/listeners won't waste too much valuable time on something that will bore their customers.

Clearly it is surprising it didn't receive much attention. The fact that it wasn't getting much attention caused it to get attention ! by the mainstream media itself. You can argue with me as long as you like about is but the facts are the facts, look back over the video's I posted for reassurance.

humanji wrote: »

But you're missing the point. If people can't trust what the media reports, why would they trust the media reporting on this? Isn't it a contradiction? And lets be honest, the majority of people watching mainstream media couldn't give a toss about the protest. They might watch a few seconds and then change the channel. Those with an interest in it would generally seek out information instead of waiting for it to be shown to them.

I'm not missing the point. I havnt heard any of the protesters mention they don't trust the media, that was something studiorat mentioned. If the majority of people couldn't give a toss about it it's because they are conditioned to not give a toss.
This thread isnt aimed at those who dont give a toss and I doubt the protest is either.
I assume the want media attention to make it aware to people who do give a toss, that people are finally taking a stand.

humanji wrote: »

News is a business. What is shown is what will get people watching, reading or listening. The more people doing this, the more profits are made. Reporting on something that continually happens will make people lose interest and the profits will lesson. That's why major world events are hyped to begin with and taper off soon afterwards even though they're ongoing (the reactor in Japan is a perfect example).

Agreed, I see your point, but it's not just a business, it's a tool used for pushing forward agenda or for hushing things up.

humanji wrote: »

Ironically enough, the only way the above protesters seem likely to achieve anything is if they get beaten by the cops. That gets coverage. But other than that, they're disorganised and won't achieve much until they get it together and properly take on the challenge.

Yeah, Ironically. Or that a group called anonymous post details of the whereabouts about corrupt members of the NYPD and their family members.

It certainly did the trick for you.

hooradiation

Daithi 1 wrote: »

If the NYPD acted accordingly as they should, they would have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.

Please tell me you're not stooping to making that argument.

Uuuh Patsy

Theres only one thing worse than a scumbag criminal and thats a dirty cop... I'm delighted because these type of scumbags cops think they are above the law because they are the law... I'd bet the smile was wiped well and truly off his face.. And his family will be telling him to apologise fast. Make him and his type think twice.. I can only imagine what he gets up to with no cameras around..

Daithi 1

hooradiation wrote: »

Please tell me you're not stooping to making that argument.

It's not an ideal situation and not a move I personally recommend.

Though if I attacked a member of your family, I would hardly be in a position to complain if you subsequently posted my address on the internet.

Are there some unwritten rules to being attacked by a police officer ?.
No address posting ?Is it ok if he lives alone ? lol

If his family gets attacked or harassed as a result of his address being posted well then we can have a moan about it then. Though it will simply be an "eye for an eye" situation, but not really because anonymous didnt swear to protect and serve the officers family.

So the officer is still worse coz he broke an oath and the Law and abused his supposed authority.


Lets moan about that bastard !!!

jackiebaron

humanji wrote: »

That's one of the more disgusting things I've read online. You genuinely think it's ok to put this mans family in danger because of his actions?

You know, you probably trot out the tired old "eye for an eye" or "fight fire with fire" or "all's fair in love and war" cliches when it suits you like in defense of the death penalty or when protestors get beaten you probably lazily puke out the "they knew the risks" or "mess with the bull you get the horns" slogans, yet when scumbag tactics are countered with scumbag tactics, well then it's just not cricket anymore.

I hope these pigs and their families are harassed for years to come for being the corrupt, gutless thugs that they are.

hooradiation

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Though if I attacked a member of your family, I would hardly be in a position to complain if you subsequently posted my address on the internet.

Why would I even do that? What point could it possible serve, especially when mechanisms already exist to bring someone who attacked a member of my family to justice?

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Are there some unwritten rules to being attacked by a police officer ?.
No address posting ?Is it ok if he lives alone ? lol

It's not ok, ever. For anyone.

Daithi 1 wrote: »

If his family gets attacked or harassed as a result of his address being posted well then we can have a moan about it then. Though it will simply be an "eye for an eye" situation, but not really because anonymous didnt swear to protect and serve the officers family.

So, by joining the police force the privacy and safety of your family is forfeit? And this is assuming that the posted details are accurate.
But this is all ok, because we can simply defer any actual thinking about how irresponsible and stupid this is until something actually happens, and then we can take comfort in that 'fact' that...

Daithi 1 wrote: »

the officer is still worse coz he broke an oath and the Law and abused his supposed authority.

Marvellous.

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Lets moan about that bastard !!!

I'd rather 'moan' about the shitty double standards and contemptuous drivel like this

jackiebaron wrote: »

I hope these pigs and their families are harassed for years to come for being the corrupt, gutless thugs that they are.

Stay classy, Jackie.

Daithi 1

hooradiation wrote: »

Why would I even do that? What point could it possible serve, especially when mechanisms already exist to bring someone who attacked a member of my family to justice?

These mechanisms exist but not for the Police.

Now there is a new mechanism that exists.

hooradiation wrote: »

It's not ok, ever. For anyone.

But it's ok for police to beat up on innocent woman ?

hooradiation wrote: »

So, by joining the police force the privacy and safety of your family is forfeit? And this is assuming that the posted details are accurate.
But this is all ok, because we can simply defer any actual thinking about how irresponsible and stupid this is until something actually happens, and then we can take comfort in that 'fact' that...

No, beating up innocent girls you forfeit the safety of your family.

hooradiation wrote: »

Marvellous.

Indeed.

hooradiation wrote: »

I'd rather 'moan' about the shitty double standards and contemptuous drivel like this.

So I see. Your doing a great job.

hooradiation wrote: »

Stay classy, Jackie.

Yup. Class act Jackie !

King Mob

So we can throw the presumption of innocence and right to a trial out of the window for cops as well.
Well I guess that's ok since we can just assume that they are corrupt and guilty, therefore deserve any punishment without annoying stuff like due process and retributive justice.

I like how these cops deserve it because they think they are above the law, so punishment is doled out to them by people who are acting above the law.

Daithi 1

King Mob wrote: »

So we can throw the presumption of innocence and right to a trial out of the window for cops as well.
Well I guess that's ok since we can just assume that they are corrupt and guilty, therefore deserve any punishment without annoying stuff like due process and retributive justice.

I like how these cops deserve it because they think they are above the law, so punishment is doled out to them by people who are acting above the law.

I like that too. Cool isn't it

hooradiation

Daithi 1 wrote: »

These mechanisms exist but not for the Police.

Yeah, they do - policemen are not above the law.

Daithi 1 wrote: »

But it's ok for police to beat up on innocent woman ?

I'd love to know how you've decided that this is my position.

Daithi 1 wrote: »

No, beating up innocent girls you forfeit the safety of your family.

Wow. That's pretty special.
I have no words for how disgusting I find your opinions that won't get me banned.

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Yup. Class act Jackie !

No, you see, Jackie and you are, in fact, the opposite of classy.
I admit my wording might have been a bit misleading, but I would have thought the contempt in which I hold both your opinions on this to be obvious.

Daithi 1

hooradiation wrote: »

Yeah, they do - policemen are not above the law.



I'd love to know how you've decided that this is my position.



Wow. That's pretty special.
I have no words for how disgusting I find your opinions that won't get me banned.




No, you see, Jackie and you are, in fact, the opposite of classy.
I admit my wording might have been a bit misleading, but I would have thought the contempt in which I hold both your opinions on this to be obvious.

Yet, here you are. :rolleyes: