9 ms·

The mainstream news reporting on Portland (and other regional rioting) got to the point where they were bald-faced lying about peaceful protests standing in fro

by zaroth 6y ago

The mainstream news reporting on Portland (and other regional rioting) got to the point where they were bald-faced lying about peaceful protests standing in front of burning buildings. The most charitable interpretation I can think of is that these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white. There can be a concept of “BLM” that is obviously right and important to support, while there is also a well organized radical contingent taking cover within BLM that is wreaking havoc on the streets and will bully or beat up anyone who stands up to them (police or bystander alike). That they call themselves anti-fascists while taking a truly fascist approach to spreading their ideology is a rhetorical pattern I’m seeing a lot lately; accusing your opponent of exactly what you are doing. Portland just “celebrated” their 100th day of rioting. There was video from last night where they set a fellow rioter on fire while trying to throw Molotov cocktails at police. The PR / social media contingent that supports the riots is frankly impressive. The article mentions Google sheets listing approved journalists and ways to help fund them. The level of organization belies a depth to the organization that I think most people assume is more organic and rag-tag than it really is.

mc32 6y ago
Obviously this is to control the narrative. Why would they shoo and have "minders" ala repressive regimes? Is it because "fake news" (that'd be a tough sell coming from the left who question that assertion). Is it because they don't want people to see the underbelly of the movement or at least the bad elements in their movement? What we do know is that if you are an organization looking for change, if you're not very careful, your well intended movement will be usurped by those who have ulterior motives --they will use your movement as "useful idiots" and you may ultimately loose control of your movement to demagogues. There is a difference between people who are honestly looking to make things better and those riding such wave to enhance their own power.
- smitty1e 6y ago
  I was on the edge of the Tea Party protests a decade back. The Deep State crushed that effort via the IRS leaning on the leadership. Social Media has us on the cusp of genuine, organic local leadership of society. But there is a continuous tension to resolve between the Young Turks and the Ancien Regime.
- prepend 6y ago
  > What we do know is that if you are an organization looking for change, if you're not very careful, your well intended movement will be usurped by those who have ulterior motives It seems to me, as an outsider, that this has already happened given what started as good intentions from occupy Wall Street down to whatever we have now. I can’t imagine the goal was actually burning buildings, but is a subversion of the goal.
  - WealthVsSurvive 6y ago
    It is on-record at this point that US federal and local agents infiltrate these organizations and run a divide-and-conquer playbook. When you fight against the monetized weight of these efforts, they write articles like this one, attempting to invoke the imaginary leftist authoritarian boogey-man. The best part of this article is that it linked the demands of the protestors, which I fully, 100% across-the-board support: https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands.
    - prepend 6y ago
      I think some of these demands are valuable for society and I support #2-6,9-10. But I don’t think they should be a condition for allowing an individual or journalist to record or cover protests. I’m not sure what you mean as “on-record,” but I think it’s naive to assume that all this violence is a result of US federal and local agents. In fact, I’d be surprised if any is as I don’t think agents aren’t allowed to commit crimes as part of their enforcement operations. I also don’t think a law enforcement conspiracy could be conducted at such a large scale with such efficiency and without leaving tons of evidence that would be the best story of the year. In a year of great stories for the press. If this is the case, then we need more reporting, not less. If every furniture that is burned down is the result of agent provocateur, then let’s get some investigative journalists on it.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  >Is it because "fake news" (that'd be a tough sell coming from the left who question that assertion). What does this mean?
sneak 6y ago
> The mainstream news reporting on Portland (and other regional rioting) got to the point where they were bald-faced lying about peaceful protests standing in front of burning buildings. It’s a little bit cliche, but also true: to judge a protest by its most violent elements but to decline to do the same of the police is the language of the oppressor. Everyone I saw celebrating 100 days was celebrating 100 days of sustained protesting—not violence. Those same people have bemoaned the escalation of violence that happens against the protests each night by police. The fact that some of the protestors have turned violent is, to me, entirely reasonable considering the sustained months of police violence that have been inflicted upon them illegally. If the state wants people to respect the laws and remain peaceful, it needs to clean its own house of violent criminals first. Ironically, that’s why the protests happened in the first place. Let’s not forget cause and effect.
- rbecker 6y ago
  > It’s a little bit cliche, but also true: to judge a protest by its most violent elements but to decline to do the same of the police is the language of the oppressor. Then lucky us to have the news correct our judgement by withholding key facts. Edit: When replying to my extremely short comment, I would be grateful if you took the time to first read it. The single sentence I wrote neither claims the attempts at censorship were perfect, nor that the police were perfect little angels, nor does it equate anything (such as violence by one side) with anything else.
  - sneak 6y ago
    I’ve seen no shortage of pearl-clutching over breathlessly reported videos of almost all of the violence so far. Some buildings and vehicles have burned. On the other hand, children have been shot in the face with projectiles and suffered TBIs. Police have permanently blinded people and shattered bones. I think it is a mistake to even begin to equate the amount of police violence that has been inflicted with the violence that has resulted from rioting. The police have been inflicting permanent injuries indiscriminately on anyone present. There is no comparison or remotely corresponding events in terms of violence from the protests, with the exception perhaps of the people who attacked Rittenhouse.
the-dude 6y ago
In my experience from the Dutch press, they are all very left leaning. Especially our public broadcasters. There is hardly any right leaning press in The Netherlands.
- kyrra 6y ago
  The US is the same way, most reporters are democrats. See: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubble-real-journalism-jobs-east-coast-215048 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bub... https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journalist_donations_go_to_Democrats https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journali...
  - gbrown 6y ago
    1. Forget reporters, our media is run mostly by mega-corporations. 2. Democrat != liberal, Republican != conservative, especially when comparing between countries
    - Fellshard 6y ago
      The bigger point is that once side of a partisan divide represents the vast majority of media resources, and the last several years have pulled back the curtain on their partisan behavior.
- Yetanfou 6y ago
  In the Netherlands, just like in Sweden and many other European countries you more or less need to balance the left-leaning main stream media opinion with some of the alternative channels - Geenstijl in the Netherlands and Nyheter Idag in Sweden to name a few - to get something which resembles the truth. I generally find you can get a good grasp of the political balance of main stream media in a country by looking at whether that country has a thriving alternative news scene. If it does, the media tends to be tilted in one direction, if it doesn't the media is either more balanced or the country oppresses alternative media sources. In that case those alternative sources tend to sprout outside of the country, e.g. Epoch Times vs the PRC. I also suspect the term 'alternative news sources' is ripe for overhaul, especially in those countries where these sources play a large role - e.g. Sweden. This is already happening in a way there, the division goes more towards whether a news organisation underwrites the ethical guidelines for news reporting ('pressetiska regler' in Swedish) or not. Another rather important division in Sweden is that between organisations which get monetary support from the state and those which do not, either because they do not want to be encumbered (e.g. "Nyheter Idag") or because they do not follow the ethical guidelines (many others).
formercoder 6y ago
I’ve found that most people I speak to can’t accept that most issues are complex shades of gray. It’s all our team or their team based on whatever news channel they subscribe to. No one takes time to dig below the surface and think for themselves.
- seebetter 6y ago
  And in reality, we’re really more alike than we realize. It’s just the political parties and media have financalized everything. American politics is more just crony wealth transfers to vying corporate factions. We’re all victims to an undefined enemy but we’re fighting ourselves.
  - humanrebar 6y ago
    The parties are fairly weak to be honest. Otherwise, Trump wouldn't have been nominated in the first place and Sanders wouldn't have had two strong runs at the presidency. The voters are self-incentivized to break off into factions. I think what has been slowly changing and coming to a head is that the checks and balances in the American system have been eroded and calcified. When everything is all or nothing and mechanisms for compromise stop being used (i.e. legislation, policy diversity across states), then everything is a Big Deal.
- Hnrobert42 6y ago
  I think this is a natural, human tendency. Us vs. them. Tribalism. That sort of thing.
  - formercoder 6y ago
    Certainly. I even catch myself doing it too. I’ve had to develop a kind of framework for considering political issues to avoid it: What’s best for me? What’s best for my family? What’s best for my community? What’s best for my country? What’s best for the planet? Often these questions have contradicting answers. However once I think through them, I can at least begin to structure an opinion.
Kednicma 6y ago
Which buildings have been burned, exactly? Local reporting covered the Molotov cocktails last night [0] but did not indicate that any buildings were being burned down or even caught on fire. Portlanders continue to note that most of the city is unaffected by protests. Life goes on as normal. Only a couple specific blocks downtown are contested, and only because the police have chosen to make those blocks into a battleground. Edit: Downvoters, which buildings have been burned? Bootlicking isn't cute, it's servile. If you cannot back up your claims about Portland, maybe stop making them. [0] https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/portland-protest-declared-riot-soon-after-it-begins-in-se-portland-live-updates.html https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/portland-protest-dec...
- cwhiz 6y ago
  Police are making it a battleground? Not the people throwing Molotov cocktails, fireworks, and bricks. No, it is the police who have made it a battleground.
  - Anderkent 6y ago
    Both sides need to be present to escalate the situation. If you look at the videos from a couple weeks ago of the police just herding protests with tear gas and dragging people into vans, they're not exactly a deescalating presence.
  - kombucha111 6y ago
    the police have been making it worse. Using questionable tactics, using disproportionate force, lieing, inciting/supporting one side over the other, using beyond questionable reasoning for declaring a riot, using agent provocateur ...i could go on. Check out Blue Leaks as well. The fact is the majority of the media covering Portland are not showing the whole story.
    - cwhiz 6y ago
      Citizens have constitutional rights to peaceably assemble. The language is right there in the bill of rights. Police don’t show up and corral peaceful protesters who applied for, and were granted, permits for demonstrations. When an assembly becomes not peaceful it ceases to be lawful. If unlawful protesters do not disperse police must use what you call “questionable” tactics to remove them. The rule of law must be upheld.
bananaface 6y ago
Egregious contradictions that enrage a significant segment of the population (especially those outside your normal readership) get your story shared approximately a gazillion times. E.g. the stories you saw were the ones that were egregious. A given story might be propaganda but a lot of this stuff is just a marketing strategy.
- zaroth 6y ago
  If the content is the marketing then it ceases to be journalism. Yes, this is probably stating the obvious. In this case then, we’ve lost something important. What we got to replace it seems to me like it’s actively hostile to a peaceful republic. I’s like to think that just as much as part of our brain turns on for the click bait, another part equally yearns for a source of truth, or as close to it as our meager egos can allow for.
  - bananaface 6y ago
    Almost all commercial journalism is marketing. Journalism as an industry doesn't exist to inform you, it exists to make money.
    - WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
      Journalism's duty (implied by the press' constitutional protections) is to hold the powerful accountable.
      - bananaface 6y ago
        Maybe, but that's not what actually drives their behaviour.
fit2rule 6y ago
>accusing your opponent of exactly what you are doing In American culture, duplicity carries currency. If you can successfully pull off a duplicitous act, you gain respect from your peers. It should be no surprise that duplicity is being weaponised against social movements which aim to remove the incumbents. This is a key mechanic behind American culture today. Say one thing - do the other thing, entirely. Take, for example, America's support of the KSA's genocide in Yemen. Americans think their military is an honourable fighting force - the burning piles of rubble it leaves, filled with innocent bodies, all over the globe - is another thing, entirely. Until Western culture starts to devalue duplicity, we will always have to wade through a minefield of deceit and cowardice. Duplicity at scale is how citizens are convinced to support a system which seeks only to steal from them. A trillion dollars for war - a pittance for health care - is not an easy con to pull unless you can be duplicitous at scale... the military junta which currently runs America has gotten very, very good at this over the years.
- macawfish 6y ago
  I don't know why this comment got downvoted so heavily. I think what you're saying is insightful. This kind of culture puts the US at high risk of falling deep into the kind of corrupt, low trust world seen e.g. in Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. When manipulative behaviors are normalized and rewarded, manipulative, corrupt people take power. And when the regime's power collapses and the pie starts to shrink, the fighting gets nasty.
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    Americans don't like to be reminded of the immense crimes against humanity that their state is committing, and has been committing for decades. It is relevant to the same mechanics that keep American society fighting with itself, over issues such as human rights, police brutality, creeping totalitarian-authoritarianism, etc. Its telling, actually: this just proves the point that duplicity is key to American culture. It is a cowardly act to ignore America's war crimes and crimes against humanity, and as the situation gets worse and worse, Americans seem to be doubling down on their own hubris. >Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union America, post-9/11, has basically followed the same trajectory, albeit with a lot more hubris and self-assurance regarding the inescapability of American military power. However, those of us who are watching, see the decline of American power, not the growth of it. Americans can ignore their states burning piles of rubble, and millions and millions of innocent victims murdered by Americas criminal war coalition - but a lot of the rest of the world is not so blind, nor ignorant, of what is happening. Yemen is the latest casualty of duplicitous American politics - it beggars belief that the genocide of twenty million people is being supported by the 5-eyes military. Whatever the "Russians have on Trump", its nothing compared to what the KSA must have on the CFR and Joint Chiefs of Staff ..
czbond 6y ago
The small acts of violence are either a brilliant strategy move of RNC, or a lapse of strategy on the far left. Small bouts of violence are completely de-lever the strategic impact of the intended gatherings from an optics perspective. Someone smart realized that if violence dominoes a bit, along with some press leverage, it creates families afraid of 'defunded police and personal safety issues'. The allowance in Chicago, Portland, Seattle literally played to Trump's hand - which I suspect is the opposite of what organizers believe. Edit: This is my independent view as a libertarian.
- liability 6y ago
  > The small acts of violence are either a brilliant strategy move of RNC, or a lapse of strategy on the far left. There's another option: it's neither of these because neither political party actually has control over the solution. They're both reacting to the actions of individuals they cannot control. If Nancy Pelosi and Trump both got together for a heartwarming bipartisan plea for both 'sides' in Portland to settle down, I don't think it would change anything because neither the RNC nor the DNC are actually calling the shots.
  - czbond 6y ago
    Oh of course, the local chapter in each city is where the leadership lack would have happened.
Yetanfou 6y ago
> There can be a concept of “BLM” that is obviously right and important to support, while there is also a well organized radical contingent taking cover within BLM that is wreaking havoc on the streets and will bully or beat up anyone who stands up to them (police or bystander alike). For starters I'd suggest not putting black lives matter in capitals since that acronym covers both the tautological expression as well as the Marxist organisation which has taken this moniker. Yes, lives matter no matter the colour of the skin, why do you ask? No, I will not support the organisation which has co-opted the name since they only use the name to further their political agenda.
- MadSudaca 6y ago
  I agree with what you’re saying. The fact you get downvoted speaks of the success they’ve had masquerading themselves as a good or “peaceful” movement. People, I know you mean well but remember that bad things that look good can cause much more harm than things that look outright bad. Be skeptical.
- Twixes 6y ago
  Yes, on the face it's tautological. In reality it isn't, because black lives clearly do not matter as much as white ones, particularly to the police, but also to many other institutions public and private alike. That's what the struggle is for, and behind it is an unorganized popular movement, not any "Marxist" organization.
kombucha111 6y ago
Honestly, the media is way off about the Portland protests. Take it from people on the ground: the picture painted by the media is largely wrong and mostly inadequate.
- awerawerawrjhui 6y ago
  So what's the accurate picture from people on the ground?
  - landryraccoon 6y ago
    This is only one data point but I was in Portland this week trying to get away from smoke and it was all peaceful. The protestors I saw looked like kids and older folks out in for a rally. Some were wearing bright vests for visibility, probably from cars. All in all it didn’t seem too wild to me and I’m sure I didn’t see all the protests, again this is just one guy walking down the street. I never felt unsafe for what it’s worth.
    - Fellshard 6y ago
      And what happens once night falls?
      - kombucha111 6y ago
        A small minority get violent and the cops prematurely declare a riot? Portland is not the war zone the media claims it is.
        chipsa 6y ago
        Is this before or after rioters set someone on fire with a molotov?
        kombucha111 6y ago
        Likely before?
dalbasal 6y ago
"these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white." This is one of the main phenomenon of an issue becoming "political," or what Orwell called "nationalism" in a clunky-but-brilliant essay. It's a "with us or against us" dynamic. Every fact, opinion or take can only be an argument for or against a position. When it's at peak (like now in the states), you get completely warped pictures. It's either peaceful protests vs brutal police and pro-trump militias or anarchist riots vs embattled police and law abiding patriots. I think part of the problem here is that everyone is a belligerent. The media, the police, the protestors and (obviously) the government are all objects of protest, which makes them participants. The CNN siege in NY was a sharp example. Another part of the issue is the typical modern leaderlessness of populist politics. Spokespersons usually moderate a position, establishing boundaries to consensus. This can take some of the edge off the "my side, your side" dynamic that more extreme actors benefit from.
- liability 6y ago
  > The CNN siege in NY I believe that was in Atlanta.
  - dalbasal 6y ago
    my mistake.
- zaroth 6y ago
  Is this the essay you were referring to? https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/notes-on-nationalism/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...
  - dalbasal 6y ago
    yep
Mediterraneo10 6y ago
I have also seen little reporting on what I suspect (admittedly, merely judging from photos) has driven a lot of the more confrontational protesting in Portland: youthful energy and enthusiasm that doesn’t actually think that much about theory or aims. Press coverage and the attacks of ideological opponents depict these protestors as a focused political force that knows exactly what it seeks and why it is doing the specific things it is doing, but I don't believe that is actually the case. You would think that after May '68, people would be aware of this. Back then the French Communist Party, the Maoists, and the Situationists who developed elaborate theory and carefully pursued their goals, were seen as boring windbags by the actual masses of young people in the streets. Most of those young people were not coming out with clear policy aims and strategy, but rather they were motivated by a more vague feeling of discontent at the authorities, by the pleasure of rebelling, and by the satisfaction of being part of a community with fellow protestors.
- coldpie 6y ago
  There are well articulated lists of demands from leaders of the movements. Not everyone in the gatherings needs to be super well-versed in the policy details to support them. Here are some examples: More modest: https://8cantwait.org/ https://8cantwait.org/ Larger scale: https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands You can probably find more local information from your local BLM or other social justice organizations. Here is a specific example from where I live, the Twin Cities: https://www.reclaimtheblock.org/home https://www.reclaimtheblock.org/home
  - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
    "Not everyone in the gatherings needs to be super well-versed in the policy details to support them." It's not that they don't know the finer policy details, it's that many of the on-the-ground protestors probably aren't even aware of every one of these demands. When young people are driven to attend protests because of the general outrage about black victims of police violence, how many of them really know, for example, that payment of reparations is part of a list of demands that has been published somewhere?
  - 6y ago
conception 6y ago
This thread is obviously going to get very political but I feel like before people get too anti fascists vs nonviolence should check some of the history they were taught in school for cracks. A few threads worth reading - https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1270076281040797699?s=20 https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/127007628104079769... https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1186468302400507904?s=20 https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/118646830240050790... https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1224881005120630787?lang=en https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/12248810051...
matthewdgreen 6y ago
I don’t live in Portland so obviously none of this worries me all that much. My city has had bad riots but they passed and actually things are much better now. I expect even a lot of people in Portland are upset by it, but aren’t in immediate near-term danger. I don’t believe that these riots are going to spread nationwide and result in a breakdown of society, even if sensationalist news stories tell you that’s going to happen. However what is new this time is that for the first time, the President of the most powerful national government on the planet is threatening to use Federal police powers against not only Portland, but cities all over the US that he sees as politically opposing him. And there’s a very decent chance that he will get away with this, even if it’s technically illegal. That scares the crap out of me. The fact that commenters on HN are taking predictable sides in a “political debate” in the face of such massive stakes doesn’t surprise me. But I wish those people could think two moves ahead and see how vastly disproportional the two sets of problems are. We’re in a very dangerous place as a nation and you’re worrying about some idiots on a street in Oregon.
- macawfish 6y ago
  He even said he'd send armed personnel to watch the polls :(
  - Simulacra 6y ago
    Would you prefer he send the Black Panthers? https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/black-panthers-georgia-pictures/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/black-panthers-georgia-pic...
    - ryani 6y ago
      Did you even read the article you linked? It states directly that there is no evidence that people pictured approached polling places nor voters. They were photographed at a political rally for their own group, and like many 2nd amendment focused political groups, open-carried at their own rally.
monadic2 6y ago
Why is a burning building is so much more traumatizing to americans than people dying violently and unnecessarily to police?
dghughes 6y ago
> The mainstream news reporting... That's an incredibly generalized statement. All "mainstream news" from all countries of the world that are in Portland, BBC, al-Jazeera, CBC, le Monde, PBS, CTV, Reuters, AP and so on? (I don't know all the names of news orgs from memory)
throw6654324 6y ago
Thhey did the same type of reporting during the Hong Kong protests. Completely brushed over the rioting, the destruction of public property, and even attacks on bystanders speaking Mandarin (there were incidents of Japanese and Taiwanese reporters being attacked by protesters who thought they were Mainland Chinese). There were also Molotov cocktails thrown at police, and some protesters were shooting arrows. That’s what sells, so it makes sense they would have that narrative.
pmoriarty 6y ago
I would sincerely like to know which non-mainstream news reporting organization you get your information from to so confidently opine that the mainstream media are being too soft on the protestors in Portland. Somehow I suspect that it's not The Nation or Democracy Now! and more like Breitbart or FOX.
- twirlock 6y ago
  I'm trying to figure out how it's even possible that you're asking this question while simultaneously being under the impression that you know what you're talking about.
evrydayhustling 6y ago
Does someone have a list of verifiable comparisons between coverage and (evidence of) events that you respect? This comment and article are "raising concerns", but not contributing to a more realistic public record.
at_a_remove 6y ago
People.com had "Bill Murray’s son, Caleb, was arrested at a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest after allegedly throwing a rock through the window of a pickup truck." So, it is simultaneously peaceful and you have someone chucking rocks through windows (as well as other things, as the article continues).
manicdee 6y ago
> The PR / social media contingent that supports the riots is frankly impressive. Would you say they're organised "organically" or are they well organised and funded, as if there's big money backing these riots?

by zaroth 6y ago

mc32 6y ago

Obviously this is to control the narrative. Why would they shoo and have "minders" ala repressive regimes? Is it because "fake news" (that'd be a tough sell coming from the left who question that assertion). Is it because they don't want people to see the underbelly of the movement or at least the bad elements in their movement? What we do know is that if you are an organization looking for change, if you're not very careful, your well intended movement will be usurped by those who have ulterior motives --they will use your movement as "useful idiots" and you may ultimately loose control of your movement to demagogues. There is a difference between people who are honestly looking to make things better and those riding such wave to enhance their own power.

smitty1e 6y ago
I was on the edge of the Tea Party protests a decade back. The Deep State crushed that effort via the IRS leaning on the leadership. Social Media has us on the cusp of genuine, organic local leadership of society. But there is a continuous tension to resolve between the Young Turks and the Ancien Regime.
prepend 6y ago
> What we do know is that if you are an organization looking for change, if you're not very careful, your well intended movement will be usurped by those who have ulterior motives It seems to me, as an outsider, that this has already happened given what started as good intentions from occupy Wall Street down to whatever we have now. I can’t imagine the goal was actually burning buildings, but is a subversion of the goal.
- WealthVsSurvive 6y ago
  It is on-record at this point that US federal and local agents infiltrate these organizations and run a divide-and-conquer playbook. When you fight against the monetized weight of these efforts, they write articles like this one, attempting to invoke the imaginary leftist authoritarian boogey-man. The best part of this article is that it linked the demands of the protestors, which I fully, 100% across-the-board support: https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands.
  - prepend 6y ago
    I think some of these demands are valuable for society and I support #2-6,9-10. But I don’t think they should be a condition for allowing an individual or journalist to record or cover protests. I’m not sure what you mean as “on-record,” but I think it’s naive to assume that all this violence is a result of US federal and local agents. In fact, I’d be surprised if any is as I don’t think agents aren’t allowed to commit crimes as part of their enforcement operations. I also don’t think a law enforcement conspiracy could be conducted at such a large scale with such efficiency and without leaving tons of evidence that would be the best story of the year. In a year of great stories for the press. If this is the case, then we need more reporting, not less. If every furniture that is burned down is the result of agent provocateur, then let’s get some investigative journalists on it.
happytoexplain 6y ago
>Is it because "fake news" (that'd be a tough sell coming from the left who question that assertion). What does this mean?

sneak 6y ago

> The mainstream news reporting on Portland (and other regional rioting) got to the point where they were bald-faced lying about peaceful protests standing in front of burning buildings. It’s a little bit cliche, but also true: to judge a protest by its most violent elements but to decline to do the same of the police is the language of the oppressor. Everyone I saw celebrating 100 days was celebrating 100 days of sustained protesting—not violence. Those same people have bemoaned the escalation of violence that happens against the protests each night by police. The fact that some of the protestors have turned violent is, to me, entirely reasonable considering the sustained months of police violence that have been inflicted upon them illegally. If the state wants people to respect the laws and remain peaceful, it needs to clean its own house of violent criminals first. Ironically, that’s why the protests happened in the first place. Let’s not forget cause and effect.

rbecker 6y ago
> It’s a little bit cliche, but also true: to judge a protest by its most violent elements but to decline to do the same of the police is the language of the oppressor. Then lucky us to have the news correct our judgement by withholding key facts. Edit: When replying to my extremely short comment, I would be grateful if you took the time to first read it. The single sentence I wrote neither claims the attempts at censorship were perfect, nor that the police were perfect little angels, nor does it equate anything (such as violence by one side) with anything else.
- sneak 6y ago
  I’ve seen no shortage of pearl-clutching over breathlessly reported videos of almost all of the violence so far. Some buildings and vehicles have burned. On the other hand, children have been shot in the face with projectiles and suffered TBIs. Police have permanently blinded people and shattered bones. I think it is a mistake to even begin to equate the amount of police violence that has been inflicted with the violence that has resulted from rioting. The police have been inflicting permanent injuries indiscriminately on anyone present. There is no comparison or remotely corresponding events in terms of violence from the protests, with the exception perhaps of the people who attacked Rittenhouse.

the-dude 6y ago

In my experience from the Dutch press, they are all very left leaning. Especially our public broadcasters. There is hardly any right leaning press in The Netherlands.

kyrra 6y ago
The US is the same way, most reporters are democrats. See: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubble-real-journalism-jobs-east-coast-215048 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bub... https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journalist_donations_go_to_Democrats https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journali...
- gbrown 6y ago
  1. Forget reporters, our media is run mostly by mega-corporations. 2. Democrat != liberal, Republican != conservative, especially when comparing between countries
  - Fellshard 6y ago
    The bigger point is that once side of a partisan divide represents the vast majority of media resources, and the last several years have pulled back the curtain on their partisan behavior.
Yetanfou 6y ago
In the Netherlands, just like in Sweden and many other European countries you more or less need to balance the left-leaning main stream media opinion with some of the alternative channels - Geenstijl in the Netherlands and Nyheter Idag in Sweden to name a few - to get something which resembles the truth. I generally find you can get a good grasp of the political balance of main stream media in a country by looking at whether that country has a thriving alternative news scene. If it does, the media tends to be tilted in one direction, if it doesn't the media is either more balanced or the country oppresses alternative media sources. In that case those alternative sources tend to sprout outside of the country, e.g. Epoch Times vs the PRC. I also suspect the term 'alternative news sources' is ripe for overhaul, especially in those countries where these sources play a large role - e.g. Sweden. This is already happening in a way there, the division goes more towards whether a news organisation underwrites the ethical guidelines for news reporting ('pressetiska regler' in Swedish) or not. Another rather important division in Sweden is that between organisations which get monetary support from the state and those which do not, either because they do not want to be encumbered (e.g. "Nyheter Idag") or because they do not follow the ethical guidelines (many others).

formercoder 6y ago

I’ve found that most people I speak to can’t accept that most issues are complex shades of gray. It’s all our team or their team based on whatever news channel they subscribe to. No one takes time to dig below the surface and think for themselves.

seebetter 6y ago
And in reality, we’re really more alike than we realize. It’s just the political parties and media have financalized everything. American politics is more just crony wealth transfers to vying corporate factions. We’re all victims to an undefined enemy but we’re fighting ourselves.
- humanrebar 6y ago
  The parties are fairly weak to be honest. Otherwise, Trump wouldn't have been nominated in the first place and Sanders wouldn't have had two strong runs at the presidency. The voters are self-incentivized to break off into factions. I think what has been slowly changing and coming to a head is that the checks and balances in the American system have been eroded and calcified. When everything is all or nothing and mechanisms for compromise stop being used (i.e. legislation, policy diversity across states), then everything is a Big Deal.
Hnrobert42 6y ago
I think this is a natural, human tendency. Us vs. them. Tribalism. That sort of thing.
- formercoder 6y ago
  Certainly. I even catch myself doing it too. I’ve had to develop a kind of framework for considering political issues to avoid it: What’s best for me? What’s best for my family? What’s best for my community? What’s best for my country? What’s best for the planet? Often these questions have contradicting answers. However once I think through them, I can at least begin to structure an opinion.

Kednicma 6y ago

Which buildings have been burned, exactly? Local reporting covered the Molotov cocktails last night [0] but did not indicate that any buildings were being burned down or even caught on fire. Portlanders continue to note that most of the city is unaffected by protests. Life goes on as normal. Only a couple specific blocks downtown are contested, and only because the police have chosen to make those blocks into a battleground. Edit: Downvoters, which buildings have been burned? Bootlicking isn't cute, it's servile. If you cannot back up your claims about Portland, maybe stop making them. [0] https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/portland-protest-declared-riot-soon-after-it-begins-in-se-portland-live-updates.html https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/portland-protest-dec...

cwhiz 6y ago
Police are making it a battleground? Not the people throwing Molotov cocktails, fireworks, and bricks. No, it is the police who have made it a battleground.
- Anderkent 6y ago
  Both sides need to be present to escalate the situation. If you look at the videos from a couple weeks ago of the police just herding protests with tear gas and dragging people into vans, they're not exactly a deescalating presence.
- kombucha111 6y ago
  the police have been making it worse. Using questionable tactics, using disproportionate force, lieing, inciting/supporting one side over the other, using beyond questionable reasoning for declaring a riot, using agent provocateur ...i could go on. Check out Blue Leaks as well. The fact is the majority of the media covering Portland are not showing the whole story.
  - cwhiz 6y ago
    Citizens have constitutional rights to peaceably assemble. The language is right there in the bill of rights. Police don’t show up and corral peaceful protesters who applied for, and were granted, permits for demonstrations. When an assembly becomes not peaceful it ceases to be lawful. If unlawful protesters do not disperse police must use what you call “questionable” tactics to remove them. The rule of law must be upheld.

bananaface 6y ago

Egregious contradictions that enrage a significant segment of the population (especially those outside your normal readership) get your story shared approximately a gazillion times. E.g. the stories you saw were the ones that were egregious. A given story might be propaganda but a lot of this stuff is just a marketing strategy.

zaroth 6y ago
If the content is the marketing then it ceases to be journalism. Yes, this is probably stating the obvious. In this case then, we’ve lost something important. What we got to replace it seems to me like it’s actively hostile to a peaceful republic. I’s like to think that just as much as part of our brain turns on for the click bait, another part equally yearns for a source of truth, or as close to it as our meager egos can allow for.
- bananaface 6y ago
  Almost all commercial journalism is marketing. Journalism as an industry doesn't exist to inform you, it exists to make money.
  - WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
    Journalism's duty (implied by the press' constitutional protections) is to hold the powerful accountable.
    - bananaface 6y ago
      Maybe, but that's not what actually drives their behaviour.

fit2rule 6y ago

>accusing your opponent of exactly what you are doing In American culture, duplicity carries currency. If you can successfully pull off a duplicitous act, you gain respect from your peers. It should be no surprise that duplicity is being weaponised against social movements which aim to remove the incumbents. This is a key mechanic behind American culture today. Say one thing - do the other thing, entirely. Take, for example, America's support of the KSA's genocide in Yemen. Americans think their military is an honourable fighting force - the burning piles of rubble it leaves, filled with innocent bodies, all over the globe - is another thing, entirely. Until Western culture starts to devalue duplicity, we will always have to wade through a minefield of deceit and cowardice. Duplicity at scale is how citizens are convinced to support a system which seeks only to steal from them. A trillion dollars for war - a pittance for health care - is not an easy con to pull unless you can be duplicitous at scale... the military junta which currently runs America has gotten very, very good at this over the years.

macawfish 6y ago
I don't know why this comment got downvoted so heavily. I think what you're saying is insightful. This kind of culture puts the US at high risk of falling deep into the kind of corrupt, low trust world seen e.g. in Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. When manipulative behaviors are normalized and rewarded, manipulative, corrupt people take power. And when the regime's power collapses and the pie starts to shrink, the fighting gets nasty.
- fit2rule 6y ago
  Americans don't like to be reminded of the immense crimes against humanity that their state is committing, and has been committing for decades. It is relevant to the same mechanics that keep American society fighting with itself, over issues such as human rights, police brutality, creeping totalitarian-authoritarianism, etc. Its telling, actually: this just proves the point that duplicity is key to American culture. It is a cowardly act to ignore America's war crimes and crimes against humanity, and as the situation gets worse and worse, Americans seem to be doubling down on their own hubris. >Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union America, post-9/11, has basically followed the same trajectory, albeit with a lot more hubris and self-assurance regarding the inescapability of American military power. However, those of us who are watching, see the decline of American power, not the growth of it. Americans can ignore their states burning piles of rubble, and millions and millions of innocent victims murdered by Americas criminal war coalition - but a lot of the rest of the world is not so blind, nor ignorant, of what is happening. Yemen is the latest casualty of duplicitous American politics - it beggars belief that the genocide of twenty million people is being supported by the 5-eyes military. Whatever the "Russians have on Trump", its nothing compared to what the KSA must have on the CFR and Joint Chiefs of Staff ..

czbond 6y ago

The small acts of violence are either a brilliant strategy move of RNC, or a lapse of strategy on the far left. Small bouts of violence are completely de-lever the strategic impact of the intended gatherings from an optics perspective. Someone smart realized that if violence dominoes a bit, along with some press leverage, it creates families afraid of 'defunded police and personal safety issues'. The allowance in Chicago, Portland, Seattle literally played to Trump's hand - which I suspect is the opposite of what organizers believe. Edit: This is my independent view as a libertarian.

liability 6y ago
> The small acts of violence are either a brilliant strategy move of RNC, or a lapse of strategy on the far left. There's another option: it's neither of these because neither political party actually has control over the solution. They're both reacting to the actions of individuals they cannot control. If Nancy Pelosi and Trump both got together for a heartwarming bipartisan plea for both 'sides' in Portland to settle down, I don't think it would change anything because neither the RNC nor the DNC are actually calling the shots.
- czbond 6y ago
  Oh of course, the local chapter in each city is where the leadership lack would have happened.

Yetanfou 6y ago

> There can be a concept of “BLM” that is obviously right and important to support, while there is also a well organized radical contingent taking cover within BLM that is wreaking havoc on the streets and will bully or beat up anyone who stands up to them (police or bystander alike). For starters I'd suggest not putting black lives matter in capitals since that acronym covers both the tautological expression as well as the Marxist organisation which has taken this moniker. Yes, lives matter no matter the colour of the skin, why do you ask? No, I will not support the organisation which has co-opted the name since they only use the name to further their political agenda.

MadSudaca 6y ago
I agree with what you’re saying. The fact you get downvoted speaks of the success they’ve had masquerading themselves as a good or “peaceful” movement. People, I know you mean well but remember that bad things that look good can cause much more harm than things that look outright bad. Be skeptical.
Twixes 6y ago
Yes, on the face it's tautological. In reality it isn't, because black lives clearly do not matter as much as white ones, particularly to the police, but also to many other institutions public and private alike. That's what the struggle is for, and behind it is an unorganized popular movement, not any "Marxist" organization.

kombucha111 6y ago

Honestly, the media is way off about the Portland protests. Take it from people on the ground: the picture painted by the media is largely wrong and mostly inadequate.

awerawerawrjhui 6y ago
So what's the accurate picture from people on the ground?
- landryraccoon 6y ago
  This is only one data point but I was in Portland this week trying to get away from smoke and it was all peaceful. The protestors I saw looked like kids and older folks out in for a rally. Some were wearing bright vests for visibility, probably from cars. All in all it didn’t seem too wild to me and I’m sure I didn’t see all the protests, again this is just one guy walking down the street. I never felt unsafe for what it’s worth.
  - Fellshard 6y ago
    And what happens once night falls?
    - kombucha111 6y ago
      A small minority get violent and the cops prematurely declare a riot? Portland is not the war zone the media claims it is.
      - chipsa 6y ago
        Is this before or after rioters set someone on fire with a molotov?
        kombucha111 6y ago
        Likely before?

dalbasal 6y ago

"these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white." This is one of the main phenomenon of an issue becoming "political," or what Orwell called "nationalism" in a clunky-but-brilliant essay. It's a "with us or against us" dynamic. Every fact, opinion or take can only be an argument for or against a position. When it's at peak (like now in the states), you get completely warped pictures. It's either peaceful protests vs brutal police and pro-trump militias or anarchist riots vs embattled police and law abiding patriots. I think part of the problem here is that everyone is a belligerent. The media, the police, the protestors and (obviously) the government are all objects of protest, which makes them participants. The CNN siege in NY was a sharp example. Another part of the issue is the typical modern leaderlessness of populist politics. Spokespersons usually moderate a position, establishing boundaries to consensus. This can take some of the edge off the "my side, your side" dynamic that more extreme actors benefit from.

liability 6y ago
> The CNN siege in NY I believe that was in Atlanta.
- dalbasal 6y ago
  my mistake.
zaroth 6y ago
Is this the essay you were referring to? https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/notes-on-nationalism/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...
- dalbasal 6y ago
  yep

Mediterraneo10 6y ago

I have also seen little reporting on what I suspect (admittedly, merely judging from photos) has driven a lot of the more confrontational protesting in Portland: youthful energy and enthusiasm that doesn’t actually think that much about theory or aims. Press coverage and the attacks of ideological opponents depict these protestors as a focused political force that knows exactly what it seeks and why it is doing the specific things it is doing, but I don't believe that is actually the case. You would think that after May '68, people would be aware of this. Back then the French Communist Party, the Maoists, and the Situationists who developed elaborate theory and carefully pursued their goals, were seen as boring windbags by the actual masses of young people in the streets. Most of those young people were not coming out with clear policy aims and strategy, but rather they were motivated by a more vague feeling of discontent at the authorities, by the pleasure of rebelling, and by the satisfaction of being part of a community with fellow protestors.

coldpie 6y ago
There are well articulated lists of demands from leaders of the movements. Not everyone in the gatherings needs to be super well-versed in the policy details to support them. Here are some examples: More modest: https://8cantwait.org/ https://8cantwait.org/ Larger scale: https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands https://www.tenforjustice.com/demands You can probably find more local information from your local BLM or other social justice organizations. Here is a specific example from where I live, the Twin Cities: https://www.reclaimtheblock.org/home https://www.reclaimtheblock.org/home
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago
  "Not everyone in the gatherings needs to be super well-versed in the policy details to support them." It's not that they don't know the finer policy details, it's that many of the on-the-ground protestors probably aren't even aware of every one of these demands. When young people are driven to attend protests because of the general outrage about black victims of police violence, how many of them really know, for example, that payment of reparations is part of a list of demands that has been published somewhere?
- 6y ago

conception 6y ago

This thread is obviously going to get very political but I feel like before people get too anti fascists vs nonviolence should check some of the history they were taught in school for cracks. A few threads worth reading - https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1270076281040797699?s=20 https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/127007628104079769... https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1186468302400507904?s=20 https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/118646830240050790... https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1224881005120630787?lang=en https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/12248810051...

matthewdgreen 6y ago

I don’t live in Portland so obviously none of this worries me all that much. My city has had bad riots but they passed and actually things are much better now. I expect even a lot of people in Portland are upset by it, but aren’t in immediate near-term danger. I don’t believe that these riots are going to spread nationwide and result in a breakdown of society, even if sensationalist news stories tell you that’s going to happen. However what is new this time is that for the first time, the President of the most powerful national government on the planet is threatening to use Federal police powers against not only Portland, but cities all over the US that he sees as politically opposing him. And there’s a very decent chance that he will get away with this, even if it’s technically illegal. That scares the crap out of me. The fact that commenters on HN are taking predictable sides in a “political debate” in the face of such massive stakes doesn’t surprise me. But I wish those people could think two moves ahead and see how vastly disproportional the two sets of problems are. We’re in a very dangerous place as a nation and you’re worrying about some idiots on a street in Oregon.

macawfish 6y ago
He even said he'd send armed personnel to watch the polls :(
- Simulacra 6y ago
  Would you prefer he send the Black Panthers? https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/black-panthers-georgia-pictures/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/black-panthers-georgia-pic...
  - ryani 6y ago
    Did you even read the article you linked? It states directly that there is no evidence that people pictured approached polling places nor voters. They were photographed at a political rally for their own group, and like many 2nd amendment focused political groups, open-carried at their own rally.

monadic2 6y ago

Why is a burning building is so much more traumatizing to americans than people dying violently and unnecessarily to police?

dghughes 6y ago

> The mainstream news reporting... That's an incredibly generalized statement. All "mainstream news" from all countries of the world that are in Portland, BBC, al-Jazeera, CBC, le Monde, PBS, CTV, Reuters, AP and so on? (I don't know all the names of news orgs from memory)

throw6654324 6y ago

Thhey did the same type of reporting during the Hong Kong protests. Completely brushed over the rioting, the destruction of public property, and even attacks on bystanders speaking Mandarin (there were incidents of Japanese and Taiwanese reporters being attacked by protesters who thought they were Mainland Chinese). There were also Molotov cocktails thrown at police, and some protesters were shooting arrows. That’s what sells, so it makes sense they would have that narrative.

pmoriarty 6y ago

I would sincerely like to know which non-mainstream news reporting organization you get your information from to so confidently opine that the mainstream media are being too soft on the protestors in Portland. Somehow I suspect that it's not The Nation or Democracy Now! and more like Breitbart or FOX.

twirlock 6y ago
I'm trying to figure out how it's even possible that you're asking this question while simultaneously being under the impression that you know what you're talking about.

evrydayhustling 6y ago

Does someone have a list of verifiable comparisons between coverage and (evidence of) events that you respect? This comment and article are "raising concerns", but not contributing to a more realistic public record.

at_a_remove 6y ago

People.com had "Bill Murray’s son, Caleb, was arrested at a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest after allegedly throwing a rock through the window of a pickup truck." So, it is simultaneously peaceful and you have someone chucking rocks through windows (as well as other things, as the article continues).

manicdee 6y ago

> The PR / social media contingent that supports the riots is frankly impressive. Would you say they're organised "organically" or are they well organised and funded, as if there's big money backing these riots?