From:   Joshua van Praag <jvanpraag@me.com>
Sent time:   Wednesday, September 21, 2011 2:33:24 PM
To:   september17@googlegroups.com
Subject:   Re: [september17discuss] A word about outreach
 

Just been trawling the blogs for people's comments. A lot of stuff coming up about lack of coverage in the mainstream media and many people I speak to around NYC have no idea what's going on.  RSN (Reader Supported news) has put together a good page which is being constantly updated.

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/7468-occupy-wall-street-take-the-bull-by-the-horns

 I include a couple of comments from their site below re media. I think we all need to start having some more creative discussions about ways in which we can start to put pressure on some media outlets to cover the sit-in. Amy Goodman and Michael Moore have both hit the nail on the head when they make the tea party comparison. 

The Murdoch News of the world scandal in the UK has introduced the potential to dramatically shift the public's perspective of mainstream media with the unvarnished revelations of criminality and its insidious relationship to the state apparatus. 

Things here haven't reached that point yet -- however, rivalry between select networks and broadsheets has never been so intense as these companies fight for their share in an increasingly unstable market. All you have to do is look at the extraordinary coverage the NYT gave to the phone hacking scandal - dozens of page 1 specials above the fold - and understand that they may have been motivated by something over than the pursuit of truth :-)  I realise that this may seem like a far-fetched analogy but when I saw the articles on the Yahoo censorship that started to pop up it made me start thinking about all of this stuff. What if we did send delegations to midtown to protest outside media organisations? And we start making lack of media coverage a story in and of itself?

Thoughts anyone?



+8# Torvus 2011-09-19 15:03
And reading the comments about lack of sufficient media coverage, maybe protestors should demonstrate outside some of the media's centres of operation? If certain of the media are so negatively selective in disseminating demonstrators news and views, what is their news 'coverage' worth? That should get exposure and an overhaul along with Wall Street.

 
+8# Dave45 2011-09-19 21:02
This is so great to see. Wouldn't it be great if "Occupy Wall Street" was only part one, with part two being a similar occupation of the media giants who refuse to cover part one (or anything else slightly out of the ordinary that is beneficial for common people).Obama--pay attention!The White House could be next.
 


Joshua van Praag
jvanpraag@me.com

+1.347.445.8315
+44.(0)7787.896952

On Sep 21, 2011, at 3:54 PM, Micah White <micahmwhite@gmail.com> wrote:

Harrison, I don't understand: there is no "riot porn" on Adbusters, and the scary video that grimwomyn is talking about is on the frontpage of your site: occupywallst.org
 
Email me off list if you have any comments about anything on adbusters.org -- however, let's be respectful of the different perspectives that each of us is bringing to this occupation.
 
Micah

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Harrison Schultz <schuh072@gmail.com> wrote:
I hope we can get this to Micah White and the AdBusters staff's attention, I wrote them a really scathing email about all this back in the quite old days of Saturday GA bickering sessions, maybe now he'll take this more seriously,

Rad/left through out the phrase the "Renaissance of Wall Street" which I think sums this up.  I think this is the right direction for our demand/message to move in.

H.   





On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 7:22 AM, grimwomyn <grimwomyn@gmail.com> wrote:
Just seconding the thought about watching out for "riot porn." I wrote to a journalist from WIRED on Twitter inviting him to spend the night in the park and his response is as follows:

"@grimwomyn The second post down makes that seem pretty scary. I hope everyone is (and stays) okay."

Support, but fear of coming to the park. :(


< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >