The U-T ran a story today (Monday) covering the Sunday downtown protest against the evil-Koch brothers and other rich folks reportedly meeting in an unknown area hotel to discuss funding limited government candidates and causes. Fair enough. Political rallies and protests by every side deserve media coverage.
But a FIFTEEN PERSON protest? Come ON, man!!
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/jun/24/rally-targets-kochs-political-influence/
“Rally targets Koch brothers’ political influence”
Indeed, the rally was organized by a PHOENIX, AZ Occupy activist. He was the main spokesperson at the pathetic “event.” So at most, 14 misguided locals turned out, in a county of over three million people.
Questions for the U-T (and the media):
- If I can get (drum roll) SIXTEEN people to attend a protest, can I get a U-T story detailing my concerns?
- If I get (bigger drum roll) ONE HUNDRED people to show up, can I score some front page, above-the-fold publicity for my cause?
- Where was the highly publicized San Diego Occupy movement? Does it even exist any more?
Comments 4
Author
My friend Allen Hemphill brought to my attention a very similar Occupy “rally” last Thursday on the Palomar Community College campus in San Marcos. 12 people showed up, including the organizers.
They literally sat around on the grass and aimlessly exchanged left wing slogans while grousing about college tuition and everything else imaginable.
Sure enough — the NORTH COUNTY TIMES dutifully ran a detailed story on on this “event,” complete with photos.
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/san-marcos/san-marcos-occupy-education-protestors-gather-at-palomar-college/article_a022d90e-e40d-5b1b-929a-f123eb5d4393.html#ixzz1qci6zxWQ
Richard,
Documenting coverage of these nanoprotests provides good context for when you ask for your own event coverage.
That said, I can make a reasonable conjecture of how these events got covered. (Note that I said conjecture – I have no inside knowledge of these specific articles.)
The stories concerned high-profile issues, and based on previous protests, it would not be unreasonable to expect large crowds. So the story gets assigned and the reporters show up.
Now you’ve got an investment in time and have set aside space in the newspaper for a story. Canceling the story means the reporters have wasted their time and there’s a hole to fill, on deadline.
Suboptimal, for sure.
Author
I agree on WHY the story appeared, Brad. Actually for BOTH stories I presented above.
But to me the news story was the pathetically small turnout, not the issues discussed. Emphasis should have been on the lack of support, which indeed is the only newsworthy aspect of the event.
Imagine the slant of the press coverage if this had been a “Tea Party” protest or rally. I suspect the emphasis would have been on the sad turnout (observations on the demise of the Tea Party movement) rather than the subject of the protest — and rightly so.
Author
“Nanoprotests.” I LIKE that, Brad!