(indy)Media analysis of pre-Shannon coverage

national | miscellaneous | news report Monday March 03, 2003 10:47 by path in exile - THE STRUCTURELESSNESS OF TYRANNY CAN BE OVERCOME rhizomix at dublin dot com the independent, autonomous zone of the BLANCH six six six, sixty-nine, sixty-nine

more wanky, self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual shit talking from "the path" - still in exile (but not for long now...)

Morning.

Lets just do a bit of smart-arse media analysis of the run up to the protest in Shannon. The language used in reports, both by journalists, politicians, and other members of "non-violent" peace groups helped to create an atmosphere of tension and fear that ultimately led to some groups withdrawing their support for the Shannon demo, and probably encouraging a lot of people not to go.

I think my particular favourite was this gem from Tom Brady in the Indo: "On Wednesday the Irish Independent disclosed that organisers were advising participants to split into two groups when they arrived in Shannon - marked out by white and pink flags." (http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=926740&issue_id=8825)

That word "disclose" is so loaded - often used in the context of "disclosing a secret". As if the Indo journo had somehow done a load of investigative journalism, and uncovered a secret plan being hatched by a bunch of crazies; instead of the information being publicly posted on several websites.

Stuff like this - and the fact that they have the "security editor" assigned to the story, instead of a political correspondent - skews public opinion away from the issues surrounding the protest, and the method of direct action, and instead hypes the event into something its not.

Tom Brady again: "Intelligence gleaned by the gardai has also confirmed that some of the organisers of tomorrow's demonstration were also involved in masterminding the Reclaim the Streets protests in the centre of Dublin on May Day last year."

That word "masterminding". As if somehow putting together a street party was akin to plotting a terrorist act. Here the Gardai are drawing parallels to a protest that they initially claimed turned violent because of the crowd hitting them; when of course the violence was all on their side! THEY were the ones who started the "riot", and then when the footage of them beating people up was shown to them by the inquiry, they were unable to identify their work colleagues! Yet still the association of violence with RTS is there in the public mind, so even the mention of it will refresh people's memory of the clashes in the streets.

I'd also like to know exactly how the Gardai "gleaned" their "intelligence" about the RTS members. Perhaps they went on the internet, a public domain, and read posts by people who also posted about RTS? Well done lads! It's good to see you're spending your time productively, instead of investigating corruption in politics or business.

Again the use of certain words makes it appear that there is something sinister being planned clandestinely, when all of this information had been made public beforehand on the internet.

Brady's article on the Wednesday (http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=925353&issue_id=8811): "The cost to the taxpayer of providing additional security at Shannon since the two attacks on a US military plane last month is estimated by Defence Minister Michael Smith at €40,000 a week."

Here Brady is using an old ploy to put the protesters in a negative light. It is them and their actions that is costing you, the reader, the taxpayer, all of this money. Conveniently omitting in the same breath that the Government makes money from the planes landing there illegally. Stating this on the same day the Government decided it would buy itself a nice extra private jet to ferry the political elite back and forth from their ivory towers in Europe when Ireland has the presidency of the EU next year.

This turn of phrase is an attempt to separate the anti war protesters from the public at large. Brady is implying they are different to the "ordinary taxpayer citizen" - as if none of the protesters pay taxes either!

I wanted to analyse some of the RTE reports but for some reason I cant connect Real Player to their site at the moment, maybe some other time.

The timing of the RTE reports was almost Orwellian. Not so much as a sniff about the direct action plans during the week, but come Friday, the day beforehand, it was getting prime coverage, with lots of emphasis on the supposed "split" in the movement, and again the air in a Charlie Bird report that the information posted on the web was a secret that had been uncovered by investigative journalism techniques.

The timing of these reports also means that room for logical discussion and debate about direct action tactics is non-existent. Instead of us having a week of informed analysis and time for different groups to explain their differing methods, we have a day of frenzied pull-outs, hastily organised "counter" protests, the media claiming there's a massive rift in the antiwar movement, and individuals going on the radio speaking for groups that they dont belong to.

RTE also said in one of their reports that the protest had been called by a group called "Direct Action". What lazy-ass writer scripts their reports? Do your homework! If they had read ANY single site they would have seen the protest was called by the Grassroots Gathering/GNAW.

Alright, that's enough of that for the moment I think. I'm tired and cant be arsed searching through the Examiner's archives.