This thread is a good example of you posting an article that actually supports what I have said on the MSM attempts to destroy the Occupy! movement.
The "blackout" - - i.e., the initial coverage of the occupation in the early days - - is not really discussed in the only meaningful way that a blackout can be discussed, i.e. in the amount of press coverage (which can be measured in column inches) given to the early days of the rally, as opposed to how much coverage even the smallest Tea Party protest used to garner.
The "slander" - -
First of all, the article admits that 8 out of 44 sources studied DID describe the movement as leftist, extremist, revolutionary, communist, etc. I am sure that those 8 considered that these words were defamatory and would hurt the movement by turning folks away from it. But there for sure you have a segment of the MSM engaged in outright trashing of the movement.
For the rest of the MSM studied in your article, the overall effect was to portray the movement, with or without the "noble, but" in front, as misguided, confused, addled, silly, chaotic, naive, etc. One of the sources in that same article purported to provide a "list" of demands and grievances, all of which were, or could easily be considered to be, trivial and silly. Left off the list were key complaints or grievances, noted at virtually every rally every day, such as looting the Treasury, crashing the economy, buying the polticians, causing wars, etc. By presenting a "list of demands" made exclusively of the silliest and least resonating, and leaving out the main demands fuelling the protest, a conscious effort was made to defame the movement as silly and frivolous.
The very article you posted proves everything I said about the MSM's approach to the Occupy Wall Street! movement and you STILL don't get it? Gimme a break! And stop pretending that "Noble but . . ." isn't a put-down. You're establishing nothing but your own ignorance by maintaining that.
