EricByler's blog

by Eric Byler

On the Thom Hartmann radio show recently, I voiced for the first time my deep concern that 1% Media outlets have undermined the trust relationships between law enforcement and Occupy communities by producing and disseminating propaganda.  The video below from #OccupyDC shows how. 

I recently witnessed and reported on a situation at #OccupyLA that might well have devolved into violence if not for the improving relationship of trust between the Los Angeles Police Department and the public they serve.  The relationship between law enforcement and the public is a complicated one that should not be manipulated for political purposes.  Regardless of how we feel about their political motives, we must hold media outlets and bloggers on all sides of the political divide responsible when they undermine that trust.  When the public loses trust and/or respect for law enforcement, it undermines their ability to keep our communities safe, not just in Occupy camps, but everywhere.

During the first month of #OccupyDC, I saw nothing but positive interactions between protesters and law enforcement.  In fact, I often witnessed police officers expressing support for protesters while on duty.  That began to change after a politically motivated media campaign succeeded in creating tension and distrust.

We could literally feel the atmosphere changing as politically motivated lies being presented as "journalism" by 1% Media outlets contaminated the relationship between the protesters and the police.  On Nov. 7th, when I heard that DC Police Chief Cathy Lanier had declared #OccupyDC "no longer a peaceful protest," I was surprised, but not shocked, given the onslaught of 1% Media stories with headlines like "Occupy D.C.' Goons Push Elderly Woman Down the Stairs" that were sweeping the Internet at that time (1,390,000 results if you Google Search the Fox News headline). 

Now, it may have been poor judgment on the part of #OccupyDC to assemble in front of a Koch Brothers convention, where negative emotions were already running high.  But as the video above shows, the story that the 1% Media ran with was false.  It is disappointing when the accuracy and validity of a story have no impact on the reporting of it, but it is alarming and, truly, disturbing when this type of propaganda influences the relationship between law enforcement and the public at large.  In a word, this is dangerous.

The reaction of the #OccupyDC protesters to Chief Lanier's comments was profoundly negative.  A week later, I witnessed a frightful confrontation when DC Park Police began searching Occupy tents for the man who shot at the White House (he was later apprehended in Pennsylvania).  By now, negative perception of law enforcement in the camp was beginning to prevail over the more reasonable approach of OccupyDC's main organizers.  When one of the tents was damaged during a search, a man began chanting at the top of his lungs, inches away from the officers, "Who is going to pay for my tent!!!!!"  During the next several minutes, the vastly outnumbered officers attempted to continue their search, but ultimately left in the interest of public safety after what I can only describe as a mob scene unfolded.  The attitudes of the police officers, and the attitudes of the protesters had shifted dramatically, and none of them were entirely to blame.  These are the kinds of environments that can lead to violence. 

From Guilt by Association to Guilt by Imagination

Days later, an exaggerated and speculative blog made the situation worse by adding conspiracy theory to the mix.  It began when this blog by Shawn Gaynor appeared on the website for the San Francisco Bay Guardian with the headline, "The cop group coordinating the Occupy crackdowns" (2,700,000 results on Google).  Gaynor was speaking of the Police Executives Research Forum (PERF), with whom I have worked on the issue of immigration (they came out forcefully against previous instances of politics undermining law enforcement — Arizona's SB1070 and the "Probable Cause Mandate" for immigration status checks that is the subject of the film I co-directed with Annabel Park, 9500 Liberty).  Within an hour of reading Gaynor's article, I had contacted two verifiable sources at PERF who had been on the conference calls described in it, and confirmed that the story was false.  I also called the San Francisco Bay Guardian to ask them if they stood by Gaynor's work.  I got no reply, but this does not mean that they do, or do not.

One of my definitions of partisanship is accepting or rejecting information based on whether it furthers one's political agenda; not based on its accuracy.  Call it one of my pet peeves.  So, I was more than a little annoyed when hundreds of bloggers ran with this story, citing the San Francisco Bay Guardian.  A Daily Kos blogger ran the headline, "Confirmed: Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) coordinating Occupy raids" and then came Naomi Wolf's Guardian.uk piece with a headline that began with "The Shocking Truth" (3,180,000 results).  Thankfully, it was thoroughly debunked in this article by Joshua Holland of AlterNet (138,000 results). 

If two or three sentences by a DC Police Chief created suspicion and mistrust between the citizens and law enforcement in a single Occupy camp, you can imagine the impact that this conspiracy theory must have had nationwide.

by Eric Byler

Former Bush 43 speech-writer David Frum is one of the most respected thinkers in America.  He is a free-market, limited-government, low-taxes conservative who has, in a single paragraph of his recent essay in New York Magazine, encapsulated the first 10 years of the 21st century more cogently than any writer to date:

In the aughts, Republicans held more power for longer than at any time since the twenties, yet the result was the weakest and least broadly shared economic expansion since World War II, followed by an economic crash and prolonged slump. Along the way, the GOP suffered two severe election defeats in 2006 and 2008. Imagine yourself a rank-and-file Republican in 2009: If you have not lost your job or your home, your savings have been sliced and your children cannot find work. Your retirement prospects have dimmed. Most of all, your neighbors blame you for all that has gone wrong in the country. There’s one thing you know for sure: None of this is your fault! And when the new president fails to deliver rapid recovery, he can be designated the target for everyone’s accumulated disappointment and rage. In the midst of economic wreckage, what relief to thrust all blame upon Barack Obama as the wrecker-in-chief.

In When Did the GOP Lose Touch with Reality, a penetratingly candid and immeasurably important essay published on Nov. 20, Frum says he is haunted by his time in the Bush administration although his role was not large, and, the real decision-makers seem to sleep well at night. 

I appreciate Frum's writing because he criticizes the GOP, not with ridicule or disdain, but with deep concern — concern, because he identifies as a Republican, and he knows that there are many good people in the Republican party who recognize that it has lost its way.  Frum writes about America with the same type of concern, and indeed as he explains at the end of the piece, he is committed to bringing about a course corrections within the GOP because the future of our nation as a whole (the 99 percent) depends on it.

He offers a devastating critique of Fox News and Republican radio, more powerful than any of the recriminations offered from the left:

Extremism and conflict make for bad politics but great TV. Over the past two decades, conservatism has evolved from a political philosophy into a market segment. An industry has grown up to serve that segment—and its stars have become the true thought leaders of the conservative world. The business model of the conservative media is built on two elements: provoking the audience into a fever of indignation (to keep them watching) and fomenting mistrust of all other information sources (so that they never change the channel). As a commercial proposition, this model has worked brilliantly in the Obama era. As journalism, not so much. As a tool of political mobilization, it backfires, by inciting followers to the point at which they force leaders into confrontations where everybody loses, like the summertime showdown over the debt ceiling.

by Eric Byler

To err is human, especially in high pressure situations.  Much has been said about what Rick Perry forgot to say during a recent episode of the 2012 GOP primary season.  But the real questions we should be asking have to do with what he might have said had he remembered.  Chris Mathews offers an insight here that too many have missed.

Why is so much of our political discourse framed by rhetoric with no substance or bearing on reality outside of partisan electioneering? And why do so few personalities in the 1% media question this framework? 

by Eric Byler

I was busy volunteering all day yesterday, and didn't have time to monitor all the spin.

I spent the morning of election day trying to write a non-partisan GOTV email.  It took longer than I thought. Have you ever tried it?  It's hard.  Here's what I came up with:

By helping to increase voter turnout today, we can send a message to our elected leaders: DO NOT count us out. The alienating and misleading political ads paid for by special interest groups can only have impact if too few of us vote. Our elected officials understand this equation, and they will make policy accordingly.

Before leaving the local cafe in Gainesville, VA, I had sent emails to members of the Coffee Party community in several states with the subject head: "Why America Needs (Your State) to Vote today." (My sincere apologies to my friends in Pennsylvania for the mix up, I know you do not live in New Jersey!).  Then, I voted.  Then, I drove 45 minutes across Prince William County, VA to volunteer for a friend who is also the most courageous member of my County Board of Supervisors, Frank Principi.  His district in Woodbridge, VA is one of the most diverse communities in the Commonwealth, and he has stood up for the rights of immigrants and people who appear to be immigrants even during the days when it seemed almost dangerous to do so.