Top 10 Reasons Why Mainstream Media Are Not Covering Occupy Wall Street

The mainstream media are finally covering the Occupy Wall Street Story! SavetheNews.org reported that there was an increase to nine percent in two weeks. Jon Stuart has described this as a media blackout to media circus transition.

Interestingly enough, the radical news channel, Fox News reported the story all along, without its logo. New York Times had one blog about it, while Toronto Star had a column published. Here are 10 reasons why many mainstreamed media initially did not cover the story?

 

1. Mainstream media criticizes the demonstrators for acting like anarchist hippies. Hippies were 1960s and 1970s peaceful protestors who opposed war and other policies government enacted.

 

2. Corporate media outlets almost never visit the crowd and rarely listen to what they are saying. They rather report from across the street and are on standby for violence and arrests. If they do not visit, they cannot report!

 

3. The movement attacks mainstream media because they are owned by large corporations. This means that the knives are being thrown at the media themselves. If the media show up, they may be caught in the whole chaos.

 

4. Savethenews.org also argues that mainstream media are not well equipped to deal with such protests. They thus simplify the whole situation and examine how activists protest corporate greed.

 

5. Mainstream Media are covering the protests but from a different location. They are holding interviews at Zuccotti Park where many protestors are from.

 

6. There is a great deal of confusion amongst media as well. There is no leadership in the protest and there is no single issue. The media thus does not know what it is covering.

 

7. Media crews are in actuality not covering the story, especially the raids. Police forbid them to be part or to document the raids.

 

8. Fox News believes that the people who are protesting are unemployed, lazy, drug users.

This belief is probably held amongst many mainstream media and is the probable cause of confusion.

 

9. Many mainstream media are going by their readers’ interests. Readers are not majorly interested in the protests. For example, RBJ took a poll which asked: do you support the Occupy movement in New York City? 54% said no.

 

10. Spam! Yahoo believed the news was spam when someone tried to submit an article for news release.

 

About The Author

  • Gary W.

    Hippies were 1960s and 1970s peaceful protestors who opposed war and other policies government enacted???? I guess you weren’t around in the ’60s? Educate yourself; look up the “long hot summer of 1967”, the “1968 Democratic National Convention”, the 12th Street riot, or the Watts Riot. The ‘60s weren’t as much fun as you fantasize. I was there.
    The truth is, the coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement is reflective of the coherence of their message (or lack thereof). Have you actually been to any of the “Occupy Events”?? Are you saying that there is no drug use? The assaults were committed by just ordinary folk with a message?? Give me a break… You claim to champion media freedom but want to suppress FOX news presumably because they have opinions different from your own, you want “free” press so you champion government funded and sponsored NPR. Do you want the government to seize commercial media outlets and redistribute them to selected owners that meet your sycophantic criteria? Don’t let the hypocrisy get in the way. But it certainly worked for Stalin and Hitler… You are no different than the media you criticize. They just happen to be better organized and more appealing to people willing to listen.

  • Askaroundsucka

    Its funny how from 10 points shown. You pick apart one. Yes violence occurred, in the 60s. And present day protests, it stil occurs occasionally. As for people being drug users etc… Yes that occurs also…BUT this is when you listen to the message,not the messenger. Don’t let a few bad apples screw that up.