?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Stanley Rogouski has a really excellent blog post about being… - if you can't be witty, then at least be bombastic [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
kyle cassidy

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Dec. 17th, 2011|12:51 pm]
kyle cassidy
[mood |accomplishedaccomplished]
[music |the die hard song]

Stanley Rogouski has a really excellent blog post about being arrested in NYC for taking photographs of police arresting people at an OWS protest (a reporter for SALON was also arrested in the same sweep). He's a self described "independent photojournalist ... sympathetic to the Occupy movement" - so he's got a dog in the fight, but he has several good points about why this is frightening on a grand scale, regardless of one's political beliefs.

This is the same protest where Police intentionally, and continuously, blocked a New York Times photographer from taking pictures of the same arrests (in fact, they may have been blocking the Times from photographing Rogouski's arrest) (video of that can be seen here.)

"The Media," which includes both venerable old guard institutions like the New York Times but also newer more modern media outlets and individuals, exist as the eyes and ears of "the people" -- they're there to keep the government honest -- which is why freedom of the press is guaranteed in the constitution. When the government stops the media from reporting on them, we (the people) are blind and deaf.

You can read around the politics in this post (substitute "NRA rally" or "Tea Party protest" and it still holds true) -- most importantly, I believe, among Rogouski's points are these:

1) "Nobody ... believes that Occupy Wall Street is dangerous. At the very worst, New Yorkers unsympathetic to the Occupy movement see it as an aggressive nuisance,"

and (2) I think he has a good point about these tactics being "designed to cow the independent media" - the New York Times stood by their photographer and is quick to bail other of their reporters out of jail when the NYPD throws the cuffs on them, but Rogouski and people like him are left on their own, easily susceptible to threats by the police.

I've noticed lately the (as Sarah Palin put it) "lame stream media" is no longer the standard bearer of Important Journalism - I'm learning more about breaking news from Twitter than I am from CNN. While TV news stakes out Kim Kardashian and Michael Jackson's doctor, people on the front lines are getting locked up for trying to help tell the story. The stories that the Real Media has dropped the ball on.

http://stanleyrogouski.com/blog/stanley_w_rogouski/2011/12/how-mike-bloomberg-snatched-my-eyeballs-for-the-department-of-homeland-security.html





Add me: [LiveJournal] [Facebook] [Twitter] [Google+] [Tumblr]
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: gushgush
2011-12-17 06:59 pm (UTC)
"While TV news stakes out Kim Kardashian and Michael Jackson's doctor..."

Even though I've noticed this very thing for years, it almost seems like it an organized attempt at keeping The Public's minds off of anything important, anything that might make them think about things other than being the good consumers who are happy to save up their few extra pennies to buy whatever the latest must-have product happens to be.
The powers-that-be learned way back during the Viet Nam war days that people just may get up off their collective asses to protest if they're shown what's actually happening - hence, the "implanted journalists" that tagged along with selected troops in Iraq.
the story continues...
(Reply) (Thread)
From: elusis
2011-12-17 10:23 pm (UTC)
Bread and circuses...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zebrallama
2011-12-18 02:39 pm (UTC)
yup
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: blpurdom
2011-12-17 09:13 pm (UTC)
We really are in an age of bread and circuses designed to distract the masses from what's important, IMO. Have you noticed that the Inquirer did not cover the arrest of and statements from the retired Philly police captain at OWS? Generally the excuse the Inquirer has made for not reporting on various out-of-town events is that they need a Philadelphia tie-in to justify it (although this requirement is inconsistently applied), so how is this not a Philly tie-in? Honestly, the internal censorship at the Inquirer drives me nuts. As you noted, lots of inconsequential "news" (I shouldn't even know the name "Kardashian", since we don't have cable) but little news of substance, especially if there's controversy involved.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: devotdsatellite
2011-12-18 11:08 am (UTC)
Have you read the hunger games? All the apocalyptic lit is getting. Closer to the truth.
(Reply) (Thread)