Liberal media?

[cynical]

The Tulsa World has just posted an article to their web site describing the event in the Centennial Plaza (6th and Main) in which a couple of national anti-Muslim organizations sponsored a protest of the suspension of the TPD officer who refused to attend a function at the local mosque in which the TPD was honored.  The article headline reads "Downtown rally for police captain draws hundreds of spectators." 

Here's the article: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110830_11_0_Demons331052. 

Here's a picture of "hundreds of demonstrators" taken from my office window during the demonstration:


Apologies for the poor picture quality.  The autofocus on my phone doesn't like taking pictures through windows.

What is the World's agenda that they felt compelled to exaggerate attendance at this event?

[AquaMan]

A. They probably had the headline written two days ago.

B. That was a snapshot of that moment. People come and go. The size of the crowd may stay the same but the aggregate total may have been a hundred.

C. They don't know what hundreds look like or they included auto and pedestrian traffic nearby and spectators looking out their office windows.

D. Why does the headline infer they are liberal leaning? The headline actually isn't very descriptive of one view or another.

[Townsend]

If it only said ""Downtown rally for police captain draws spectators." it wouldn't sound as good.

[TheArtist]

   I was giving a downtown deco tour to some OSU students and we went by just as they started the event. There were only 12 of us, and even counting us walking by lol, there was NOT in any way shape or form, hundreds of spectators.  And the "crowd" had dissipated by the time my group had come back around to that part off downtown".   Including the organizers themselves, I would say it would have been pushing it to say there were even 100 people there, let alone multiple hundreds of spectators.

[cynical]

@AquaMan  The subject line was a response to the newspaper giving the protest far more credibility than it actually observed, which implies an agenda, just as one of those tea party demonstrations on the national mall last year was intentionally inflated by some in the media (Fox) even to the point of using pictures from an earlier, unrelated, much larger demonstration.  I was sarcastic, but I still wonder why the Tulsa World would give this event more credibility than it had on the ground.

As Artist notes, though the picture depicts only a moment in time, that moment was representative of the protest as a whole. The observation that people can come and go is a good one, but the times I checked, the participants were sitting down on the concrete steps, police were standing around, and a few downtowners were walking by on their way to other places.  Most people seemed to give the crowd a pretty wide berth.  As you can tell from the picture, my perspective was limited to the Big Picture.  I have no idea whether there was a buzz down there. I can usually hear loud noises from up here, but heard nothing unusual today. Interestingly, though the proponents of the protest said they were there to help protect the Captain's constitutional rights, one protester carried a "Christian Flag," which conveys a different message. 

[AquaMan]

@AquaMan  The subject line was a response to the newspaper giving the protest far more credibility than it actually observed, which implies an agenda, just as one of those tea party demonstrations on the national mall last year was intentionally inflated by some in the media (Fox) even to the point of using pictures from an earlier, unrelated, much larger demonstration.  I was sarcastic, but I still wonder why the Tulsa World would give this event more credibility than it had on the ground.

As Artist notes, though the picture depicts only a moment in time, that moment was representative of the protest as a whole. The observation that people can come and go is a good one, but the times I checked, the participants were sitting down on the concrete steps, police were standing around, and a few downtowners were walking by on their way to other places.  Most people seemed to give the crowd a pretty wide berth.  As you can tell from the picture, my perspective was limited to the Big Picture.  I have no idea whether there was a buzz down there. I can usually hear loud noises from up here, but heard nothing unusual today. Interestingly, though the proponents of the protest said they were there to help protect the Captain's constitutional rights, one protester carried a "Christian Flag," which conveys a different message. 

I get it. Yeah, they may have had some sort of purpose for over estimating the crowd. Or, they may have depended on one of the organizers for the estimate and  simply gave them some added juice as a gift. Or, they may just be dumb as a bag of hammers. Having worked around some of them years ago, I'm going with the latter.

What is with this Christian flag stuff? I haven't seen it around my church. Looks like they left me out of the loop again....

[cynical]

I get it. Yeah, they may have had some sort of purpose for over estimating the crowd. Or, they may have depended on one of the organizers for the estimate and  simply gave them some added juice as a gift. Or, they may just be dumb as a bag of hammers. Having worked around some of them years ago, I'm going with the latter.

What is with this Christian flag stuff? I haven't seen it around my church. Looks like they left me out of the loop again....

The Christian Flag thing seems pretty innocuous according to the online sources I've seen. I have a distant memory of seeing the flag while growing up Presbyterian and associating that flag with the song "Onward Christian Soldiers." Perhaps it was my imagination, but I don't think I'm alone in associating it with a sort of militaristic Crusades imagery. The flag itself dates from the late 1800s, so it would not have been flying over Jerusalem in ages past.

[JeffM]

Ummm.... if this is an anti-Muslim organization waving a Christian flag and protesting the suspension of a TPD officer who refused to attend a function at the local mosque, wouldn't it reflect Conservative Media Bias by the Tulsa World if the crowd was inflated/overestimated?

Just askin'

[Teatownclown]

Ummm.... if this is an anti-Muslim organization waving a Christian flag and protesting the suspension of a TPD officer who refused to attend a function at the local mosque, wouldn't it reflect Conservative Media Bias by the Tulsa World if the crowd was inflated/overestimated?

Just askin'

They used white out.

[cynical]

Ummm.... if this is an anti-Muslim organization waving a Christian flag and protesting the suspension of a TPD officer who refused to attend a function at the local mosque, wouldn't it reflect Conservative Media Bias by the Tulsa World if the crowd was inflated/overestimated?

Just askin'

Yes. The subject heading was an ironic comment on the usual complaints about the mainstream media's famous liberal bias.

[Conan71]

Actually, the publishers of the World are considered somewhat liberal, but they pander to the conservative flair of Tulsa.  I figured inflating the numbers and giving it more attention was a way to inflict chagrin on the wing nutters, rather than supporting their point of view.

[jacobi]

Yes. The subject heading was an ironic comment on the usual complaints about the mainstream media's famous liberal bias.

Dude, is everyone's sarcasm meter turned off?

I happen to have the paper from that day on my dest (random!) and the headline reads:

TAKING A FIRM STAND
Captains suspention spurs rally, counterprotest

From what I can tell the hundred people were down at city hall, not at centenial green.  As was the counterprotest.  So the picture you took was from earlier in the day.

Ok, so the line that REALLY stuck out to me was burried on page four,

"In an earlier ACT! rally at the H.A. Chapman centenial green,... Rodgers said his organization came to Tulsa to show support for feilds, to urge the city to reinstate his lost pay and position, to clear his record and to serve notice to cities across the nation that such violations of rights will be resisted"

Ok, first off, we have enough sh*theads in oklahoma without importing them.  Especially from florida *blech*

Secondly, I would like to know how many of the people in the group are part of the traveling "we hate mooslems" show.

Thirdly, for those that are from out of state, mind your own damn beeswax.  I'm sure there are people of diferent orientations for you to bother in florida.

Fourth, I would like to know if those signatures on the petition were local or just people that no one would ever really check.

Fifth, Fields violated an order from a superior.  He's lucky he just got suspended.  If he feels that his orders were unjust or against his personal convctions that's fine.  But he should prostest them through proper channels.  OR he can protest by insubordination, but by doing so he has to accept the punishment that comes with it.  It's not like you get to boycott coke and have a cuba libre when you ge off work.  Accept that protest by defiance has consequences.

Sixth, He is involved in a lawsuit with the city anyway right now so the city responded exactly how the should: silence.

Seventh, If you read the quotes from these people, they are grade A morons.  "This is Tulsa, Not Russia."  Or the pullqoute on page one below the fold "The people who are telling us we have no right to support feilds are the same people who say Muslims are not a threat to America."

Eight, on the upside, the counterprotest outnumbered the protest by about 15 people.  I would have been there if it hadn't been for class.

Nine,  Would feilds have this support from ACT! if it turned out he was an atheist who was bathered by entering any religious establishment?  WOuldnt that just be a stitch

Ok ok I'm done.