What Kavips Said.
The News Journal sounds like Delaware Politics today.
The article is here and the headline reads: Occupy Delaware members vote to defy law, stay in Fletcher Brown Park
Well, yes.. and no. Yes they opted to stay in Fletcher Park Saturday evening after contact with the Markell administration promised no eviction would take place that night if they promised they would not be there for when the day care brought out the kids. In other words, if they left Sunday night…
Since the group had voted that they would leave Sunday night, upon finding that there was no reason they had to pack up and move, … they voted to stay camped in Fletcher for just that one night…
The headline, omits the fact that a vote was taken prior and that the group with the exception of three who voted, was emphatic that they did NOT want to be in the park and disrupt the children’s daily routine.
That is rather commendable. The reporter was present, and knew this.
Why did it not get reported?
Oh that’s easy, Kavips. Because the corporate Gannet has its spin and is sticking to it. Just like the venerable New York Times and other news organizations have published misleading or downright false articles on the Occupy Movement before this. I will be curious to know how edited Perra’s article was by his higher-ups. The movement is protesting corporations’ unbalanced control and influence over our government and the richest 1%. You didn’t think Occupy Delaware was going to get a fair shake from the News Journal, right?
If you want to protest the News Journal coverage:
So why did the News Journal bend over so far backwards to mislead? Only they can answer that. (Here is their subscription number;1-800-801-3322; wanting new revenue, they ALWAYS answer their phones) and they can transfer you to whomever they want: but someone will at least hear your message. If you want the reporter directly, Contact Esteban Parra at 1-302-324-2299 or eparra@delawareonline.com.
Shoddy Journalism. Tsk, tsk. Almost to the point of lying.
You’re faster than me, DD. I was just writing this up! 😉
Check out these paragraphs from the opening NJ article:
“And move Sunday.” It’s there, but it’s buried. Notice the word defy in the first sentence, followed by “the members opted to remain at Fletcher Brown,” and finished up with the members heading toward their tents.
You bet the News Journal has an agenda. And, in all honesty, when I first read the article I thought the Occupy DE members decided not to leave Fletcher Brown Park – just like the NJ wanted me to.
Sorry Pandora, I did not see your post. My fault.
Hmmmm…I’m not sure this account is completely right. I think OD is voting today at noon on whether to move to Brandywine Park. That implies they could decide to stay and if I’m reading my tweets right, there are definitely some who want to stay at H. Fletcher Brown.
No problem!
This post needed to go up quickly. In your post yesterday I said: Turning this story into protestors vs children (and we know the odds of the NJ reporting it this way are high) is a PR nightmare.
We always knew what the NJ would do with this story. They should be ashamed of themselves. Journalists, they are not.
I think the blame is more on the editors than the reporters. The facts were there in the story as you say. The editors spun the story the way they wanted.
I was there, folks. I know precisely what happened. The initial vote was to move last night, but then someone “misinterpreted” a comment from the ACLU lawyer as saying that the state would allow them to stay Saturday night. Then the vote to stay Saturday night was rescinded and the vote to stay till Sunday night was made. After vote was made, the ACLU lawyer told the GA that his words had been misinterpreted and that the had never agreed to allow the occupiers stay the night. But even with this new information, the GA voted to stay Saturday night was but leave on Sunday. So the News Journal got it right. The GA will decide where to go next today at noon.
You guys are really clueless.
Point One: They voted to defy the law. The headline is true.
Point Two: The article clearly states, in the first sentence, that they voted to remain overnight. The story is also true.
Point Three: Any idea that Gannett’s corporate structure is dictating story content at any of its papers is laughable. If you knew anything about the news business or the News Journal, you would be laughing, too. They are so disorganized as to be barely able to get the paper out every day. The idea of an evil overlord manipulating stories and headlines is incredibly naive.
The headline, omits the fact that a vote was taken prior and that the group with the exception of three who voted, was emphatic that they did NOT want to be in the park and disrupt the children’s daily routine.
OK, write a headline that fits all that in, then.
The headline was shameful. I agree with Kavips. I have to apologize to the Occupy Delaware movement. The headline fed my prejudices, but it is nice to be wrong on this one. I still disagree with the movement, but I now respect the Delaware organizers based upon their decision yesterday.
Anon: They didnt vote to defy the law. What law did they violate. l) under the consitution they didnt need a permit. 2) They voted to remain overnight (they have that right) and they have the right to continue the occupation just where it is. If the Police try to remove them, or arrest them, than an injunction would be filed with the court to stop them. (Every occupy group I am in touch with never asked for a permit), they occupied and when arrests began the ACLU stepped in with an injunction.
If the Snooze Journal was really interested in the rights of the people they would be discussing the consitutional rights of the people. And, the Occupiers themselves should be using their rights under the Constitution. That is the crux of this problem.
Well that clears that up… Not.
When I read the story my first impression was that the occupiers were not leaving Fletcher Brown Park ever – that they would not be moving locations. And while the technicalities, and poorly written article, may support your comments here, most readers were left with the impression that the occupiers weren’t leaving Fletcher Brown Park, that that would be there base for the duration.
Hop on over to Delawareonline and read the comments if you don’t believe me.
The name of the movement has the word ‘Occupy’ in it. Regardless of whether or not the story is accurate and/or complete, I support the Occupy movement wherever and whatever they choose to occupy.
I would prefer that they occupy Rodney Square, which juxtaposes Caesar Rodney’s ride for independence with the robber barons who currently abut and seem to rule the Square.
I believe in civil disobedience and nonviolent protest, and I, for one, would be willing to be arrested in support of those principles. But I’d like it to be in a location which illustrates the wide gulf between the haves and the have-nots. We could try to do it on the lawn of a duPont stately manse or a similarly well-heeled bank exec, or we could do it in Rodney Square.
I prefer to do it in Rodney Square. It’s time to take Caesar Rodney back from the one-percenters.
http://vimeo.com/31184525
http://youtu.be/4Adr_Pck6VI
I want to see this again, maybe OD can line this up…at a minimum it would cause confusion for cops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_mania
Pandora, you’re just reading what you want to read. No amount of facts is going to change your mind. The article and headline are 100 percent accurate, but you choose to highlight your misinterpretation of the headline and your overlooking of the critical word “overnight” in the lead. Not my problem if you have reading comprehension issues.
The headline doesn’t say “overnight.”
But… whatever. You understood the article. Everyone else? Not so much. I hope you aren’t in charge of communication – which is one of the points of OccupyDe.
But I also get your “purity” drive. You know everything. Fine. But I wouldn’t want to be part of a movement who embraces a dividing force like you.
Pandora,
You’re the purist here. You insist on the media hewing to your line, and are willing to twist the facts just like the right will.
Dana Garrett – who was ACTUALLY THERE – understood the situation just fine, and said the paper got it correct. You and the other blowhards in this thread are wrong.
The headline is NOT WRONG. They did indeed vote to stay. You are essentially criticizing it for leaving out a single word. Headlines cannot contain every scrap of information. That’s what the story is for – and the very first sentence of the story contains the piece of information you want.
You are being willfully ignorant.
I hope you aren’t in charge of communication – which is one of the points of OccupyDe.
Bwah-ha-ha-hahahahaaaa!!!
The Occupy movement is not about communication. It’s about a bunch of hippie shitkickers and union types who want to get together, hang out and talk about why their issues are so important and how we need to form a democratic process community. If it were truly about communication and education, then they would be occupying some Du Ponter’s front yard, or massing on the sidewalk outside a bank, or something similar. But it’s not about that. It’s about liberals feeling good about themselves and thinking that they’re doing something.
The Tea Party organized quickly and did do something – electoral action. That’s how Sheriff Christopher and the other Sussex Republicans got elected. The Occupy movement is going nowhere. But hey, as long as you can feel superior to everyone else and mouth Chomsky-esque phrases, that’s what it’s about, right?
The Wilmington event was among the Occupy Wall Street protests that were staged across the country Saturday to register displeasure with the widening gap between rich and poor and perceived corporate greed.
This sentence from this article is all kinds of weird. He qualifies the corporate greed part, but not the gap between rich and poor. It boggles my mind that an employee of the Gannett Company could write the words *perceived corporate greed* with a straight face.
The thing that is remarkable (and I guess not unexpected) about this article is that the NJ choose to not cover the first day of the Occupation — just this business of whether they stayed the night or not. They are working overtime here to highlight (and gin up) a controversy, with little mention of the other stuff that may have happened throughout the day.
While the News Journal did essentially get the facts right, anon’s characterization of the Occupy is cliche right-wing drivel as well as his characterization of the Tea Party movement, which was uncontroversially funded by wealthy elite interests like the Koch brothers. What characterizes the Occupy movement is a diversity of outlooks and positions as well as backgrounds. It’s hardly characterized by “a bunch of hippie shitkickers and union types who want to get together.” Just the number of young adults involved demonstrates that anon’s characterization is full of shit.
Dana,
Hippies can be young as well as old, Dana. You know the types – the young women with thick-rimmed glasses and scarves who smell of patchouli and the men who wear sandals and have skimpy goatees they think make them look thoughtful, who all engage in sensitive debates about the nature of democratic discourse and invent terms like the “People’s Microphone” while thumping their drums and smoking clove cigarettes.
The Tea Partiers may have been financed by the Koch Bros at the national level, but I’m talking about locally – the 9/12 Patriots and the First State Tea Party groups. They got their shit together and charged ahead, and are still doing so, without a whit of Koch cash. They didn’t have painful discussions about where to meet or what to “Occupy” – they raised cash, rented out a fire hall, set up online forums, brought in speakers and got themselves settled into the mainstream of downstate politics. That takes leadership – not a fucking 1960s communal campout.
Cassandra –
So just what *did* they do during the rest of the day? Wave their fingers around and establish ground rules so everyone feels safe in contributing to the commune? Give me at least five examples of actual action – not discussion or organizational steps – and I’ll dial my tune back a bit. From where I sit, figuring out where to pitch a tent and take a piss isn’t action.
Actually, anon, Christopher’s and the other rethuglican election victories had little to do with the teabaggers, but was a result of the Chrissie-pooh lemmings that voted a straight line ballot. Also, Eric Swanson ran a terrible campaign and thought he could ignore Christopher, much like Castle did with COD.
Greg Fuller lost his race because of race-baiting by Sam Wilson and the other klansmen down here.
MJ –
Christopher’s core supporters *are* the teabaggers – the new wave of conservatives who are moving here from other states. While there was a GOP wave here in Sussex, he won by a wide margin – more than 5,000 votes. People were listening to what he was saying.
But I won’t deny that all three Democrats had horrible campaigns. Swanson has never struck me as much of a campaigner, period – he’s just not the glad-handling type. Fuller is a very, very nice guy, but my guess is that while race did come into play, it was his double-dipping that really got the attention of the TPers. You just can’t pull that kind of crap on Sussex voters any more (unless your last name is Booth or Schwartzkopf). The fact that his opponent was an attractive woman didn’t hurt, either.
John Brady had to deal with a Democratic primary, the party-switching label, the anti-gay sentiment and his health – he barely stood a chance. Which is too bad, because John’s a great guy and I hope runs for something else in the future.
The NJ is reporting (via Twitter) that Occupy Delaware has rejected Brandywine Park. They are talking Rodney Square. It does sound like they aren’t staying at HFB Park.
I’m hearing that the permit to use Brandywine had interesting restrictions on it that made it unacceptable to the General Assembly like no signs on the site no talking to people in the park, no use of the restroom. I also just heard that the GA has the voted to move the occupation to Spencer and Freedom parks in downtown Wilmington.
I’ve also been told that one of the restrictions was that we could only hold gatherings at the site. Nowhere else.
I must confess I am shocked that Gov Markell would place those kinds of restrictions on us, restrictions clearly designed to confine and marginalize speech. And to think that yesterday I argued for Brandywine thinking that the Gov had made us a reasonable offer. I now regret that I argued that we should accept the Governor’s deal.
Oh, one of the other restrictions.We couldn’t use the parking spaces in the park.
I just heard that a dozen police officers are at the city/county buildings waiting for the occupiers to arrive.
So just what *did* they do during the rest of the day?
And while you rush to your idiotic and trite stereotypes, you’ve actually repeated my own question. I wasn’t there yesterday, but you’d think that a *reporter* who was would have talked about that. So we’re both in the same boat here — the person who should have been telling us what was going on the first day of this event, didn’t.
I must confess I am shocked that Gov Markell would place those kinds of restrictions on us, restrictions clearly designed to confine and marginalize speech.
Since speech=money these days, apparently our leadership no longer recognizes speech if it isn’t at a fundraiser.
cassandra, you first wrote: “the NJ choose to not cover the first day of the Occupation — just this business of whether they stayed the night or not.”
Then you wrote: “the person who should have been telling us what was going on the first day of this event, didn’t.”
Thanks for making my point! You don’t actually know if they even *DID* anything else! Yet you assumed that the reporter left information out and neglected to cover other happenings.
Reporters are not stenographers – their job is not to spew out unfiltered information. They focus on the most important things, and use their judgement and experience to figure out what those things are. If you want someone to uncritically parrot the Occupy line, then get out there and volunteer for their communications commune yourself.
Anon, cut the crap. I was there. The occupiers staged events in the park like people making speeches. They also marched from the park to uptown stopping at different places. One place was in front of the Bank of America where facts about the bank and the government’s cozy relationship with it were discussed. We were quite busy. Sorry to burst your inane right-wing stereotypes.
Here is the link to the permit proffered by the State of Delaware for Occupy Delaware to use Brandywine Park. You can see for yourself the restrictions that would have been placed on the occupiers:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6Qp_HtVXTCiYzM0MTJkZTUtZTllZC00NjJhLWEwMWYtNjhiNjQwNTM3MDA1
Reporters are not stenographers – their job is not to spew out unfiltered information.
You’d have a hard time proving this — especially by TNJ which regularly outsources the work of context to people with an axe to grind.
But since you’ve serious reading comprehension issues — Occupy Delaware had a number of events during its first day, as Dana notes. And yet the only thing you know about them from TNJ is that they voted to stay the night and the usual wingnut mouthpieces were Shocked! Shocked, I tell you!. Sheesh. Not a good showing by either you or TNJ.
But then, you may be the ideal NJ audience. In which case I’ll thank you for explaining its penchant for rehashing stuff they see on TV.
The 14th bullet in the permit says that others can use the park while the Occupiers are there. How did the Day Care get an exclusive permit for Fletcher Brown?
Wilmington sends out a Press Release:
I’m trying to figure this out. If the Brandywine Park didn’t work (and I can see why) why not just occupy Rodney Square? I mean, if this is coming down to stand-off, why not occupy the site you originally wanted? Also, is there a point occupying outside of government buildings?
” The fact that his opponent [Cindy Green] was an attractive woman didn’t hurt, either.”
Those are some SERIOUS beer goggles you walk around with, my friend…*shudder*
Pandora, the chief reason why Occupy DE did not go with Rodney Square is because the city said it had events already scheduled there. Occupy DE doesn’t want to shutdown the use of public spaces. But it does want to engage in the speech of occupation in a place that matters and in such a way that doesn’t restrict the public. We are only talking about 10 tents, probably less at this point, so there is no reason why Spenser and/or Freedom Plazas can’t be used.
It’s quite clear that both the state of Delaware and the City of Wilmington are effectively defining the kind of speech that Occupy Delaware can and cannot engage in–speech that is not occupation. They are doing it through restriction and denial.
Thanks, Dana.
@anon – “People were listening to what he was saying” regarding Christopher
yep, they sure are listening, listening to:
the bitching about the budget
showing up at GOP meetings with County Paid deputys wearing side-arms
deputys pulling over folks speeding without Police Powers
tailgaiting citizens
rumming amock
subjorning bribery on the airwaves and in print media
filing questionable police complaints then refusing to cooperate with said authorities
yup – people sure ARE listening – and are sick and tired of the crap
they dumped Christine O’Donnell and will dump Jeff Christopher as well, if the fool doesn’t get himself impeached first.
MJ is correct – he won by hanging on the witch’s coat-tails,
Cassandra and Dana – I don’t know if the Occupiers got Markell to speak or if they just smoked pot all day. I wasn’t there. But my point to
Cassandra was that she wasn’t there, either, and thus had no clue when she made that comment whether they indeed did anything beyond vote on staying overnight. She was speaking from a point of complete ignorance and trying to cover that up with a line of crap.
Aoine – “Were” vs. “are.”
Also, what is “subjorning”?
i cant type for baloney – and think in a couple of languages – it all gets jumbled in my head.
suborn
sub·orn/səˈbôrn/
Verb:
Bribe or otherwise induce (someone) to commit an unlawful act such as perjury.
Synonyms:
bribe – corrupt – tamper – nobble – buy
apologize for any confusion
if we were at election time – the verb would be *are*
but time has passed therefore the past tense you used as opposed to the present tense I had to use regarding recent events
therefore the equation is appropiate:
they *were* listening to his bullshit then.
AND
they *are* listening to his bullshit now…
did I just hear the news right? Occupy Delaare WONT be going to Brandywine Park
they WILL however go to Rodney square and the other square across from it??
She was speaking from a point of complete ignorance and trying to cover that up with a line of crap.
And your reading comprehension skills don’t get any better as the day goes on, apparently.
I rely on the newspaper to tell me about important events around my city and my state. You know, so I don’t actually *have* to get my news by actually being there. 🙄 They failed to do that here — is my point. Just deciding that the only thing that these people did all day yesterday was to vote to stay and then spinning up controversy doesn’t tell me anything about what they actually did. Which is news.
Has anybody actually applied for a permit for Rodney Square? It would be good to make them put a response on the record.
The Mayor rejected Rodney Square outright, and its a city park but run by a corporation. The protestors are now at Spencer Park can’t camp out, but can stand around overnight. The city council was asked for a waiver for Rodney Square, and other parks. The Mayor is absolutely opposed and Rago does what he is told…forget the Consitutional right to assemble.
The real anon to the phoney one…I have never smelled pot…you might want to go down there, instead of putting out lies.
This is a Consitutional issue. Why not file a class action suit as civil rights are being denied here by both city and state. They must be challenged.
Cassandra,
Your comprehension skills are the ones lacking here. You initially wrote: “the NJ choose to not cover the first day of the Occupation — just this business of whether they stayed the night or not.”
I pointed out that when you wrote that, you had no idea if anything else HAD happened on the first day. So your criticism of the NJ was full of crap. It happened to be accurate, but you’re swinging the bat with your eyes closed.
I’ve decided that anon writes for the News Journal – mainly because he ignores facts. 🙂
It happened to be accurate, but you’re swinging the bat with your eyes closed.
:boggle:
You’re probably right, P. With this particular skill set, I’m thinking he writes on the NJ editorial page. Sheesh.
What facts have I ignored?
Cassandra’s initial comment was the one that utterly ignored the facts and made assumptions not in evidence.
ummm – that would be facts not in evidence
no one would WANT to put assumptions into evidence – they would not be admitted
assumption is what the jury decides based on the admitted facts – otherwise known as a decision.
but your play on words indicates you already know that….
Except that I was right about the so-called facts not in evidence.
The thing is that I’ve been pretty closely following the Occupy Delaware planning (they are on Facebook and some of their meetings are livestreamed) and it was clear to me just from that that these folks did not go to the park on Saturday just to decide to stay overnight. In fact, few events like that happen without some activity and yet if you were to just go by the reporter’s account, you’d never know that there were speeches and marches to other places. If you are meant to be covering events like this, then cover the event — don’t just gin up controversy.
So you can keep digging your particularly ignorant hole here — this reporter failed to tell us about Occupy Delaware’s inaugural events. And in that we can see a form of editorial bias here — waiting for the misbehavior of this group rather than (or at least including) some information on what went on that day.
exactly right Cass -so Anon needs to troll on out of here
We use trolls to polish our shoes. By kicking them around that is. However, the “troll anon” doesn’t seem to be too bad, he has a valid point as Dana illustrated. His problem is he thinks it makes a difference how many times it gets stated.
Now if he can just climb aboard the bandwagon to raise taxes on the 1%, he may not be all bad.