Saturday, October 1, 2011

Occupy Wall St: Parsing the Spin

The Occupy Wall St. spin begins, or guess I should say, continues...on the Yahoo news page (where mindless celebrity and fashion trends stream as if of the greatest importance) this copy on the latest news from the OWT demonstrations -- which are referred to as "protests."
More than 500 arrested in Wall Street protest
Witnesses describe a chaotic scene on the Brooklyn Bridge as demonstrators block lanes during an unauthorized march.

The media has been criticized for not reporting on the protests. Further propaganda by Ms. Long by framing the criticism this way:
 "There has been a growing swell of coverage in mainstream media, but there has been loud complaining the cause hasn't been championed fast enough — or in the way protesters want." [italics mine]
But that's nothing, for NPR, a station I have never loved as much as many of my liberal kin, justifies their distancing from reporting on the story:

National Public Radio, which hasn't aired stories, has fielded angry communiques demanding coverage.
"The recent protests on Wall Street did not involve large numbers of people, prominent people, a great disruption or an especially clear objective," Dick Meyer, executive editor for news, explained on NPR's website.
I'm not sure how many people constitute a "large number," or what needs to happen to be considered "a great disruption." As if either are requirements for worthiness. Michael Moore arrived on the scene but he apparently  isn't considered "prominent" by NPR.  As to "clear objective" -- the message, said in many ways, but of the same intent: the people are fed up with being fucked by Wall St. Which is obvious to those who feign boredom or ignorance and shamelessly present themselves as confused or mildly baffled by those who active in Occupy Wall St.

One of the main themes in this AP propaganda piece is the refrain that there is no "clear message." Ms. Long continues pushing this idea:
"You should have a clear and convincing message, and know who is going to deliver it," said the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, a longtime civil rights activist who has participated in protests for decades. "One of the reasons to get attention is to deliver the message."
Clever, citing the authority of a civil rights activist, one who's protested himself many times. Message: if the Rev. Daughtry doesn't get it, who can?

The spin is about the message, which isn't there. The message is, the message is unclear and "vague." No focus. In case you're still on the side of the protesters, consider that they are, besides  being muddled, are liars. Maybe not intentionally, but if not intentional lying, then so disorganized they don't have their facts straight:
Misinformation has added to the confusion. For instance, a rumor sprang up on Twitter that the New York Police Department wanted to use tear gas on protesters — a crowd-control tactic the department doesn't use. The organizing group that calls itself Occupy Wall Street retracted the claim, one of several such retractions over the past several days. On Friday, it sent out a message that Radiohead would be performing in solidarity for the cause. (The band's management said it wasn't playing.)
The not so hidden spin: If you're disorganzied (and vague) and lie, whether it's by intent or by laziness, you can't be trusted or taken seriously.

There were "about 100" arrests, and the mace in the face spraying action by NYPD Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna is diminished by mentioning Anonymous posted personal information about Mr. Bologna. 

The article winds down by seeming to be balanced, and ending with the throw away line that "even" "celebrities" (further marginalization, for Moore and Saradon are hardly celebrities on the same level as "The Housewives of I Don't Give A Fuck You Shallow Insipid Drama Queens You."







No comments:

Post a Comment