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.
Listen, I do not condone any of the incidents of police brutality that have occurred in New York, Oakland, at UC Davis, and other places around the United States. Similar conditions have, unfortunately, led to similar risks and similar results. And the success of Occupy Wall Street has ensured that similar conditions would abound. Let's be fair and recognize that a movement founded upon civil disobedience is, by definition, a challenge to existing laws. We cannot react in outrage each time we see law enforcement respond. We can condemn police brutality without condemning the entire law enforcement profession. We can stand up against bad laws, and try to change them. But to oppose the idea of law enforcement is no more logical than the TEA Party's opposition to the idea of government. We must change our government. We must change many of our laws. To do that we must focus our energy on civic participation; not exploiting fears and anxieties, whether they be fears of law enforcement, of demographic shift, or of government.
Media empires and citizen journalists alike — whether they see the issues that the Occupy movement has introduced into popular discourse as threatening, or as a godsend — should put the facts first before reporting, not only to protect their own integrity, but also to protect the public.
It is never advisable to stray from the facts to further a political cause. I feel that I can make that case convincingly to those who understand the cause of the 99 percent because the facts are on our side. Yes, propaganda has been used against us, but that doesn't mean it can or should be used to fight back. Partisanship, lies, and manipulation are exactly what has pushed so many fact-based and solutions-oriented people out of the process. It's alienating, no matter who perpetrates it. And we need those people back in the process if the 99 percent is going to prevail. Let's not undermine the credibility of the Occupy movement or the 99 percent by compromising on principles, or playing loose with the facts, when the facts are on our side. Not only is it dangerous, it is also, ultimately ineffective.
Related Stories:
