<story><title>&apos;You&apos;re Not Allowed to Film&apos;: The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland</title><url>https://reason.com/2020/09/04/youre-not-allowed-to-film-the-fight-for-control-over-who-reports-from-portland/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>zaroth</author><text>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.&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;The PR &amp;#x2F; 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.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mc32</author><text>Obviously this is to control the narrative.  Why would they shoo and have &amp;quot;minders&amp;quot; ala repressive regimes?&lt;p&gt;Is it because &amp;quot;fake news&amp;quot; (that&amp;#x27;d be a tough sell coming from the left who question that assertion).  Is it because they don&amp;#x27;t want people to see the underbelly of the movement or at least the bad elements in their movement?&lt;p&gt;What we do know is that if you are an organization looking for change, if you&amp;#x27;re not very careful, your well intended movement will be usurped by those who have ulterior motives --they will use your movement as &amp;quot;useful idiots&amp;quot; and you may ultimately loose control of your movement to demagogues.&lt;p&gt;There is a difference between people who are honestly looking to make things better and those riding such wave to enhance their own power.</text></comment>
<story><title>&apos;You&apos;re Not Allowed to Film&apos;: The Fight to Control Who Reports from Portland</title><url>https://reason.com/2020/09/04/youre-not-allowed-to-film-the-fight-for-control-over-who-reports-from-portland/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>zaroth</author><text>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.&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;The PR &amp;#x2F; 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.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sneak</author><text>&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;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.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;p&gt;Ironically, that’s why the protests happened in the first place. Let’s not forget cause and effect.</text></comment>