Predictably, the local lefty “alternative” media (for those of you for whom the Strib, WCCO and MPR aren’t left enough) is up in a snit over the treatment journalists got at the convention…
…er, wait. Look at the coverage the Sorosphere gives the convention; see how often the term “media professional” pops up. Interesting turn of phrase.
But I digress. It’s interesting the number of “Journalists” whose only “story” at the convention involved tramping around with a bunch of people whose primary mission (at a high level, not necessarily among any individual protester) was to “shut down the convention” and provoke a police overreaction.
Among “journalists” who seem institutionally incapable of recognizing, much less “reporting”, a couple of key facts; that…:
- …if you’re protesting in a group of over 25 or so, and you have no permit, you have an illegal assembly. And no, that doesn’t chill free speech, because…
- …permits are issued pretty much for the asking in Saint Paul, except when EVERYONE wants one, in which case there’s a lottery. As there was, last spring. Permits are issued so that groups of, say, klansmen don’t get to demonstrate at the same time and place as, say, Holocaust survivors. And…
- …if your “demonstration” goes outside the time and place specified on the permit, your assembly is illegal. And…
- …when you’re at an illegal assembly, the Police have every right to tell you to leave. And…
- … when the police tell you to leave, it’s called a “lawful order”. You have no more business arguing with cop about an order to disperse than you do to try to try to talk your way out of showing one your drivers license when you’ve been pulled over. It’s the law. And…
- …if you resist, stall or dink around with lawful orders, you can be warned – and then force can be used to enforce the order.
Now – if any of you “media professionals can show me any stories where…:
- …the police regulated the content of any of the legal protests, or…
- …regulated the content of any “media professional”‘s coverage of any event, or…
- …broke up a legal, permitted protest where nobody was committing violence,
…then let’s talk.
And then we’ll talk about the double standard you “media professionals” practice; you condemn the police for treating “media professionals” (and dipsticks with video cameras who claimed to be “journalists”) who were standing around at illegal assemblies as what they were – poeple who are breaking the law. And then you turn around and support the Obama campaign, an administration that will make the “Fairness” Doctrine a matter of policy, which will suppress genuine, legal speech with the full weight of the federal government.
We’re talking about a group of “media professionals” (and amateurs, not that a blogger is one to crab about that) whose only focus was the protests and whatever happened to them. They cared not an iota about what happened in the Xcel Center (beyond the fact that the objects of their stereotypes and bigotry were going to be meeting there); they certainly didn’t cover the dark side of the protesters on whom they slathered endless, favorable, victim-mongering coverage (while the “demonstrators'” sandbag attacks on buses and the harassment of delegates on their way to the convention somehow never got covered. Go figure!). No, these “journalists” already had their stories written before they arrived in downtown Saint Paul.
And that’s not really “journalism”.
So maybe if we conservatives peed in buckets, slept under bridges and didn’t shower for a few weeks…?
Just as some hard core rappers want to have a police record and maybe a bullet wound or two to give them credibilty, that Democracy Now hag wanted to get arrested so now she can bitch about it for the rest of her life.
No, no, no, Mitch, they’re not “alternative” media, they’re “PROGRESSIVE” media.
Whatever the hell that means.
I found this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841
helpful on that topic, Yossarian.
I dunno. I think that a lot of reporters might find covering what was going on outside the convention more interesting. A convention — for good or ill — is an infomercial, and given the number of accredited journalists inside the Excel, it was likely that there would be many interesting stories outside the convention — and a better chance of getting an exclusive on one than the one inside.
I do think you do have a good point about at least much of the coverage of the goings-on outside the convention being done by the local lefty independent media, and it’s a good one.
The cure for that, of course, would have been for more of the local righty/moderate independent media getting out more and taking a good look. You and Ecker did, for a while; more would have been better.
I think it would have been an interesting experience if you or Brodkorb or Ed, say, had been just out of spraying range for something like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJZNkJbTpjA , or some of the other, err, alleged outrages.
…the police regulated the content of any of the legal protests
Mitch, you rightist tool of corporate domination, they clearly violated the Constitution: “A well regulated Demonstration, being necessary to the election of a Progressive slate, the right of the Protesters to keep and bear Buckets of Urine, shall not be infringed.”
It’s the 57th Amendment!
Who were the folks with urine in buckets?
More and more, it’s looking like they were hiding out with the unicorns, and other mythical creatures.
It would have been awfully easy for, well, anybody who was so inclined to carry urine- or feces-filled baggies (yucko!) and pitch them at whoever they wanted to pitch them at; neither baggies nor human waste products are exactly hard to come by.
Didn’t seem to have happened; anybody read/hear/see any credible reports of such?
dunno. I think that a lot of reporters might find covering what was going on outside the convention more interesting.
I agree. I wanted to (but couldn’t) cover the demonstrations in ’04 in NYC, since it sounded much more interesting that what happened indoors. This time was a little different – being in the building as Palin spoke was fairly electrifying.
And…
The cure for that, of course, would have been for more of the local righty/moderate independent media getting out more and taking a good look. You and Ecker did, for a while; more would have been better.
I think it would have been an interesting experience if you or Brodkorb or Ed, say, had been just out of spraying range…
Yes, indeed. Life is what happens when you’re busy making other plans. I HAD planned to be downtown all four days, out among the demonstrations the entire time (but for the occasional reception and of course the evening broadcasts). A family emergency came up, eating up all the planned vacation the previous week AND the first two days of the convo; I had to go back to work for the second half, and only got to cover the Thursday protest because my company kicked us all out at 3PM.
I’m hoping I can make it to the ’12 convention, whereever it is; hopefully my whole plan will come together!
anybody read/hear/see any credible reports of such?
None – although sandbags being dropped on passing buses is actually rather worse.
None – although sandbags being dropped on passing buses is actually rather worse.
Absolutely. And that’s well-documented, rather than increasingly clear is a [x]-serving myth. I can’t imagine you’d think I have any issue with arresting and prosecuting the folks who did that.
Yup. It’s a worse thing.
But it’s also a different thing. First amendment enthusiast though I am, I don’t see any inhibition against putting up chain link fences on top of overpasses, nor of immediately arresting anybody who attempts to take wirecutters to them; I’ve little more objection to clearing overpasses during specified-in-advance arrival and departure times, to avoid that kind of problem.
Folks — in and out of the media — throwing up their hands and writing a metaphorical blank check (in addition to the cool 50 mil that we taxpapers have already paid ) for at best questionable behavior on the grounds of the (increasingly likely to be bogus) Urinary Threat? That’s, well, not good.
I do have serious problems with some of the credible (not yet proven, but credible) accusations against various known and unknown cop types, and little reason to believe that they’ll be properly investigated and appropriate action taken.
I’d purely love to be proven wrong.