Seven Media Sins

“OLSX is anti-capitalist”

The fact is that there are a variety of views within the camp on capitalism. Many dislike the system and wish to see an alternative; many more wish to see the current model reformed. The initial statement released by the camp, which was agreed upon by consensus, makes no mention of overthrowing capitalism, yet many media outlets have taken to describing the camp as anti-capitalist. This is either lazy journalism, or it is by design. Much of the press has an agenda to discredit or marginalise the Occupy movement, and has made extensive use of labels to pigeonhole the movement.

“The movement chose to occupy St. Paul’s Cathedral”

It was never our intention to target St Pauls. The initial target of the protest was the London Stock Exchange in Paternoster Square, adjacent to the cathedral. The police got wind of this, blocked all entrances, and kettled the protesters into the courtyard at St Pauls cathedral. The Dean of the cathedral, Giles Fraser, then gave us permission to stay. For the first week we were guests of the church. The level of welcome from the cathedral may have changed since, but at no point did we choose to occupy the grounds of the cathedral. That said, we like the space and intend to stay.

“The forced the church to shut down”

The decision taken by St Pauls to shut its doors for the first time since World War II was baffling and has ultimately led to the resignation of Dean Graham Knowles. The claim that health, safety and fire regulations were to blame proved unfounded, as neither the London Health & Safety Executive nor the London Fire Brigade had any pressing concerns after the camp was re-organised during the first week. The entrances to the cathedral were unimpeded, and the camp had accommodated the cathedral’s request to clear space from the fire exits. A more likely explanation lies in the influence exerted over the cathedral by the police, the Mayor, the City of London Corporation and the extensive list of corporate and financial donors. It was the cathedral’s decision to close, and it has been much derided since.

“Most tents are unoccupied”

There has been much debate over the science of thermal imaging the occupier’s tents by a newspaper reporter, which appeared to show many empty. Occupiers hit back with claims that the thermal imaging camera doesn’t detect heat inside tents – which led to the counterclaim that occupiers had not allowed enough time for heat to build up, followed by tent makers claiming that many tents are designed to retain heat therefore rendering thermal imaging useless. Many questions remain open: Did the reporters who took the initial photographs allow enough time for heat to build up in the tents? Why did they take pictures around midnight, when most of the campers would not yet be in their tents? Are the aims of the protestors rendered less important just because some go home at night? It takes a high level of dedication to visit the camp day after day, let alone to sleep on the cold, hard concrete courtyard of St Pauls in the middle of October. As of now, hundreds stay through the nights to protest.

“The protesters are either middle-class students, or lazy benefit scroungers”

The media can’t seem to make their minds up which of the two we all are down here at the camp.  The fact is that we are a diverse grouping of classes, races, nationalities, employment status and political persuasions. This movement is not party political, nor is it class-focused. It stands against corporate greed and against the recklessness of the financial sector, and it recognises that the current political and economic model is only working for those at the top. These are issues that transcend political loyalties and class. We have many protestors here that have jobs, some that don’t, and some that have recently lost jobs. We have teachers, soldiers, civil servants, youth workers, former bankers, musicians. The labelling may serve the media’s agenda – but that alone does not make it true.

“The movement has no agenda”

The camp is not just here to provide concrete alternatives to the current failing system. It exists to facilitate debate and to serve as a forum for ideas that can be picked up and elaborated at St. Paul’s and elsewhere. Already, working groups are engaged in discussions about possible demands and concrete articulations of change proposals. We are well aware a diverse group might produce a muddled message, and that our decision making processes may appear cumbersome. But the movement intentionally stresses inclusivity and democratic processes rather than short soundbites. This may be frustrating for the media but it is vital to our message.

“The public does not support the protest”

Opinion polls suggest that the public largely support our occupation and its goals. Polls by ICM and Yougov show clear and unquestionable support for the camp (51-38% and 39-26% respectively), whilst a poll in the Guardian showed 82% support for our movement. Even 42% of Daily Telegraph readers also backed us, no mean feat considering some of the coverage they’ve given us! We’ve had emphatic support from the Guardian, the Independent, the Daily Mirror, the Observer, the Financial Times, the economic editor of BBC’s Newsnight, and from a large number of influential political commentators and economists. We’ve even had sympathetic articles in the Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph and the Economist. What defenders of the status quo fail to realise, or completely ignore, is that there is a palpable sense of public anger over the situation we find ourselves in, and it is this anger that is propelling us toward a tipping point towards achieving change