Astroturf,doesnt need watering.Just "occupywallstreet" and a PR Firm....

[CaptainAmerica]

http://gawker.com/5846154/occupy-wall-street-gets-much+needed-help-from-pr-firm


The Occupy Wall Street protesters got an unsolicited boost from the luxury Manhattan PR firm Workhouse Publicity this weekend. Good, because trying to figure out what's going on down there has been an enormous pain in the ass.

The Chelsea-based PR firm—whose clients include Mercedes-Benz Fashion Week and Saks Fifth Avenue—sent out an unsolicited email blast titled "Occupy Wall Street: News from the Front" to media outlets and celebrities last Wednesday, according to the Daily News. The email included a Facebook gallery with pictures of the protest.

This is now being seized on by people trying to argue that it's hypocritical of protesters to allow a fancy PR firm to send out an email supporting them—jumping on the same dumb meme pushed by conservative bloggers that, because they use Apple stuff, protesters can't be anti-corporate. (If they were really against corporations, see, they'd use signal fires to communicate or something?)

Whatever: It's good that the loosely-organized protesters are getting more savvy in their media outreach, whether it's through a PR firm or not. Protesters have complained of a "media blackout" (not a complaint these days, of course), but surely the lack of attention had something to do with the fact that, for reporters, pinning down what's going on with Occupy Wall Street can be a Kafkaesque nightmare—a sea of rumors and misinformation and cryptic, one-sentence "press releases" and weird stuff about zombies.

And, yes, I am still a little bitter about the time an Occupy Wall Street spokesman repeatedly told everyone Radiohead was going to be playing a show for protesters and it was all a sham! (For the record, I've heard that the guy has been "fired" as a spokesman and Occupy Wall Street's PR committee is being streamlined.)

[Image via AP]
Related Stories

Wall Street Protester's Missed Connection: 'We Got Arrested On the Brooklyn Bridge'
Surprisingly, Fox News Didn't Use This Video of a Smart, Articulate Protester
Hey Occupy Wall Street: Dressing up Like Zombies Is Dumb


Anyone who actually believes occupywallstreet is legit is fooling themselves. When we protested and marched on DC in 2008 we didn't get a single camera on us...neither did we get cameras on our Rally for the Republic...but the MSM was all over "occupywallstreet". Ask yourself why.

[pcosmar]

occupywallstreet.org did not start this.
GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEADS
They did not start it. The unions did not start it. They just showed up and got involved.

The Tea party, Ron Paul supporters and other Patriots are not there because they are not there.

Well,, there are a few, But the others are getting the media attention because they have showed up and Got Involved.

This was started online many months ago, Invitations to all were offered.

Folks ignore the invitation and then complain that only other voices are heard.
It boggles the mind.

[silverhandorder]

occupywallstreet.org did not start this.
GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEADS
They did not start it. The unions did not start it. They just showed up and got involved.

The Tea party, Ron Paul supporters and other Patriots are not there because they are not there.

Well,, there are a few, But the others are getting the media attention because they have showed up and Got Involved.

This was started online many months ago, Invitations to all were offered.

Folks ignore the invitation and then complain that only other voices are heard.
It boggles the mind.

Still the criticism stands. It is lefty movement and giving them praise makes no sense.

[pcosmar]

Still the criticism stands. It is lefty movement and giving them praise makes no sense.

Wrong.
It was an open protest.
The only reason it has become "lefty" is because no one else spoke up.

[moostraks]

occupywallstreet.org did not start this.
GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEADS
They did not start it. The unions did not start it. They just showed up and got involved.

The Tea party, Ron Paul supporters and other Patriots are not there because they are not there.

Well,, there are a few, But the others are getting the media attention because they have showed up and Got Involved.

This was started online many months ago, Invitations to all were offered.

Folks ignore the invitation and then complain that only other voices are heard.
It boggles the mind.

not to be a contrarian, okay well maybe, but what if the problem is the usual suspects(MSM) are drafting the narrative to form public opinion yet again. Three weeks in to this and it is now becoming a daily report on npr with a narrative that furthers the agenda of tptb. So does this mean that none of 'our guys' are participating? not necessarily, just that the general public will get the idea from media of what furthers the intended agenda of those behind the curtain. Wag the Dog style reporting.

[specsaregood]

Wrong.
It was an open protest.
The only reason it has become "lefty" is because no one else spoke up.

Truth in that ^.
If you want to be heard, get your ass down there and take it over.

[erowe1]

occupywallstreet.org did not start this.
GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEADS
They did not start it. The unions did not start it. They just showed up and got involved.

So who started it? Do you expect us to believe it was just spontaneous?

Somebody started it, and the reason it's played out the way it has is because that's how they wanted it to play out. If they thought occupywallstreet.org was not representative of what they were going for, then they had months to speak out against it.

[erowe1]

Truth in that ^.
If you want to be heard, get your ass down there and take it over.

You can't just take it over.

[specsaregood]

You can't just take it over.
You sure can try, it all depends on numbers. I'd settle with helping steer it.

[erowe1]

You sure can try, it all depends on numbers. I'd settle with helping steer it.

Sure. And you can try to take over the Democrat party too with an equal likelihood of success. But it's not just about numbers. It's also about organization and money. This protest didn't just happen because of a bunch of independent citizens who think for themselves.

[specsaregood]

Sure. And you can try to take over the Democrat party too with an equal likelihood of success. But it's not just about numbers. It's also about organization and money.

are the "protestors" getting paid?


This protest didn't just happen because of a bunch of independent citizens who think for themselves.

All the more reason to go out there and think for them.

[pcosmar]

So who started it? Do you expect us to believe it was just spontaneous?


This was months ago,long before people showed up,,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_9T1SPJXRI

It was an open invitation.

[erowe1]

are the "protestors" getting paid?

No, but it took money to get them to come. If we wanted to do some counter-protest, and we just now started planning for it, it would take us months to prepare, just like it took them.


All the more reason to go out there and think for them.

I can do that where I am.

[TexAg09]

I'm pretty sure Anonymous started OccupyWallStreet. I swear they sent something out like back in August or September saying they were going to occupy the area. That's why the first people there were wearing the Guy Fawkes masks.

[erowe1]

I'm pretty sure Anonymous started OccupyWallStreet.

Who's that?

[TexAg09]

Who's that?
Exactly. No one knows. They're a group of people on the internet who are really good at hacking.

Here's a wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group)

[erowe1]

Exactly. No one knows. They're a group of people on the internet who are really good at hacking.

So then saying they're behind it isn't really saying who's behind it. But some organized group of flesh-and-blood people who have names is behind it, and their purpose wasn't for it to be an anti-bailout, anti-Fed, rally that in any way benefited the cause of freedom or smaller government. Our chance to take it over came and went maybe a year ago when we didn't make it to their meeting.

[pcosmar]

So then saying they're behind it isn't really saying who's behind it. But some organized group of flesh-and-blood people who have names is behind it, and their purpose wasn't for it to be an anti-bailout, anti-Fed, rally that in any way benefited the cause of freedom or smaller government. Our chance to take it over came and went maybe a year ago when we didn't make it to their meeting.

I'll post it again,, Maybe you will watch it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XySGw-g2tyk

This was earlier this year. Other announcements have been made and have been posted here. and elsewhere.

[angelatc]

Truth in that ^.
If you want to be heard, get your ass down there and take it over.

They're protesting in the wrong place. Washington stole the money and gave it to Wall Street. Washington is where the problem lies.

[erowe1]

I'll post it again,, Maybe you will watch it.

Maybe I'll get around to it.

But before I do what is it? And what does it reveal about the people who are behind OWS?

[angelatc]

I'm pretty sure Anonymous started OccupyWallStreet. I swear they sent something out like back in August or September saying they were going to occupy the area. That's why the first people there were wearing the Guy Fawkes masks.

According to WIki, some whiny liberal Canadian anticonsumer group called Adbusters started it .

[TexAg09]

Maybe I'll get around to it.

But before I do what is it? And what does it reveal about the people who are behind OWS?
*facepalm*

Those ARE the people behind it....

[erowe1]

*facepalm*

Those ARE the people behind it....

Who are? And how do you know?

[angelatc]

*facepalm*

Those ARE the people behind it....

No, I don't see it. They wanted a thing to start June 14, and they wanted Bernanke to step down. This didn't start June 14th, and I don't see Bernanke's resignation in their list of demands.

[TexAg09]

No, I don't see it. They wanted a thing to start June 14, and they wanted Bernanke to step down. This didn't start June 14th, and I don't see Bernanke's resignation in their list of demands.
The video that was posted about June 14th was new to me. I don't follow the group or anything, but I do remember when this video came out. It made a splash on the internet and I think there were a few news articles about it. But for the most part it was brushed off.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFqYDSiLVq8

Anyways, who knows.

[pcosmar]

Adbusters may have started occupywallstreet.org. Adbusters joined in to sponsor the protest along with Anonymous.

Anonymous originally came up with the idea. And promoted it. They invited all to have their voices heard.

They have long opposed Government corruption and intrusion and are pro liberty.
They targeted Wall Street as the visible center of the Banking Industry and a center of Government Corruption, especially concerning the Bailouts.

[TexAg09]

Adbusters may have started occupywallstreet.org. Adbusters joined in to sponsor the protest along with Anonymous.

Anonymous originally came up with the idea. And promoted it. They invited all to have their voices heard.

They have long opposed Government corruption and intrusion and are pro liberty.

They targeted Wall Street as the visible center of the Banking Industry and a center of Government Corruption, especially concerning the Bailouts.
I want to highlight this post and have flares going off so everyone can see it. About sums it up

[erowe1]

Anonymous originally came up with the idea.
Who's that?



They have long opposed Government corruption and intrusion and are pro liberty.
They targeted Wall Street as the visible center of the Banking Industry and a center of Government Corruption, especially concerning the Bailouts.

So is it your opinion that this OWS turned out to be something different than what those who originally came up with the idea wanted it to be?

If so, do you have any ideas of how that came to be? It's not because the individuals who decided to participate and the causes they promote (to the extent that they promote anything) just happen to be who they happen to be.

[pcosmar]

Who's that?
A loose collection of online activists. Often associated with online privacy and security issues, but also with civil rights human rights and whistleblowers.


So is it your opinion that this OWS turned out to be something different than what those who originally came up with the idea wanted it to be?
They are one faction that chose to get involved, and have become better known due to being Vocal and Visible.
They are not the only voices represented.



If so, do you have any ideas of how that came to be? It's not because the individuals who decided to participate and the causes they promote (to the extent that they promote anything) just happen to be who they happen to be.
They are getting heard because they are there and involved. They are promoting their agenda and getting attention.

Others are not getting as much attention because they are less visible or less vocal.
There are Ron Paul folks and that has been reported, but they are few. There are Anti-War folks. Anarchists, Communists, and also capitalists that are disgusted with the corruption.
They are not all any one thing. Just thousands of pissed off people. Some have agendas, some don't. Many have solutions (right or wrong) that they are presenting.

It started with online discussions, it has moved to the street.

[CaptainAmerica]

Did you guys even read the article posted? a PR FIRM that works closely with large corporations was advertising this occupywallstreet to the MSM.

[ZanZibar]

Ron Paul on the Occupy Wall Street protest - a blog by Doug Wead, Sr Adviser to the Ron Paul 2012 Campaign:
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/10/03/ron-paul-and-the-occupy-wall-street-protest/




Ron Paul discusses it with Reason Magazine:
http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/01/ron-paul-talks-about-the-occup



And Jack Hunter discusses it on Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano last night:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3kcxARJ1YzQ