Whatever triggered the City of Oakland’s notice for Occupy Oakland / Occupy Wall Street to leave Downtown Oakland’s City Hall Plaza, the organization’s response to the eviction notice on Twitter was notable. It elected to retweet a tweet by an Oaklander who goes by @wiljago:
@wiljago wiljago
Announcement regarding eviction notice @occupyoakland: Fuck this letter. *lights it on fire* #hellaoccupy #occupyca #occupytogether #ows
5 hours ago via txt Favorite Retweet Reply
Mentioned in this Tweetoccupyoakland
Tiny Klout Flag63occupyoakland Occupy Oakland · Follow
Born October 10, 2011. Ain’t no party like a west coast party! Spread the occupations. Intensify the struggle. No to police occupation. Oakland rise up!Retweeted by occupyoakland and 3 others
It’s clear now that we’re headed to some kind of unfortunate show-down between Occupy Oakland / Occupy Wall Street and the City of Oakland, and this after days of very good relations.
While the City of Oakland has allowed Occupy Oakland / Occupy Wall Street to have basically all of City Hall Plaza and live there, complete with kids and the trappings of a mini-city, all was well, it seemed.
But then the media didn’t get what it wanted in terms of access, and so we had reports like this one from a certain conservative blogger:
Source: ABC Reporter’s Life Allegedly Threatened at Occupy Oakland; ‘We Shoot White Bitches Like You Around Here’
Early yesterday morning, we received a tip from a reader in the San Francisco East Bay area who informed us that a local reporter’s life had been threatened by an activist at the Occupy Oakland demonstration.
Our source, who is fearful of reprisal and has requested anonymity, says that KGO-TV’s Amy Hollyfield was accosted by a man who threatened her and used a racial slur:
“We shoot white bitches like you around here.”
According to our source, the Oakland Police Department was apparently called to the scene. Inquiries to the police, and to Hollyfield, which began at roughly 8 a.m. Pacific time yesterday, are still unanswered today.
Now, the blunt read of the headline doesn’t say that Hollyfield was directly threatened at all by anyone at Occupy Oakland / Occupy Wall Street.
In fact, this blogger’s received threats like that in the past, and other media types at a certain news website told me it wasn’t worth worrying about because it didn’t specifically point to me, but stated a basic desire to see me harmed just for being a black guy with an opinion.
I wasn’t trying to force my camcorder down someone’s throat.
Plus, if that happened to ABC’s Amy, she’s got to stop whining, toughen up, and tell who ever said that to her go to hell for being racist, then give em a knuckle sandwich. Amy, grow some biceps, girl!
Like this…
Uh, If that is what was actually said, that is.
Just saying – considering the conservative blogger who wrote the news.
What happened?
The whole move toward eviction seems to have been started by the selfishness of certain specific San Francisco Bay Area Media types, and perhaps with a healthy assist from Breitbart TV.
If you know that name, Breitbart TV is part of the web based media effort owned by rag tag conservative bad boy Andrew Breitbart, who put out the Hollyfield story. (Which I’m not sure would be a story for Andrew had Amy been black instead of white.)
Breitbart TV has made numerous YouTube videos under different spam channels to communicate the idea that there’s nothing but bad stuff going on at Occupy Oakland – especially with respect to the media.
Take these videos reporting on the alleged harassment of reporters, below. Note that they’re based on the news telecast of local stations, specifically ABC Channel 7 and CBS Channel 5 in San Francisco and Channel 2 News in Oakland:
(Gotta say, that last dude’s a piece of work.)
What’s interesting is that the media reports about drugs and pot-use, and even public sex (oh, come on!), didn’t start until after reporters insisted on putting their cameras in the face of Occupy Oakland / Occupy Wall Street participants.
I have a real issue with that kind media behavior.
My rule is to always ask if I can film a person; I don’t stick my camcorder in anyone’s face. I also don’t ask for a name. The idea is to get the real story, not implicate a person in some kind of way.
If some members of Occupy Oakland / Occupy Wall Street did not want to be filmed up close, then what the media should do is walk to a distance and film them from that point, or embed themselves, or pay someone in the encampment to make videos for them.
But the way the media basically has ratted on Occupy Oakland because it didn’t get what it wanted is in the form of access just plain shameful, and marks a new low in journalism.
Again, I’m a blogger, not a journalist. I use a set of rules that are more logical, effective, and non-evasive, and still gain what I seek.
There’s no reason the San Francisco Bay Area media could not do the same, and leave Andrew Brietbart out of the equation in the process.
Bill Carroll