Attn protesters: That's quite enough of 'the media is ignoring OccupyChicago' rhetoric

Oh, boo-hoo! Keep blaming people for not writing your stories for you.

WBEZ, or any other news source for that matter, has no obligation to cover anything. But it would be nice if you'd be a bit less snarky in response. Responding to protester petulance with journalistic petulance just makes WBEZ look bad. I expect better of you.

I agree that those involved in the Occupy protest should not expect media coverage simply by existing, but please don't color everyone in the movement in this kind of negative light. Most do not believe that the media is purposefully shutting them out. I have been out to the protest several times, have heard WBEZ covering the event (and also seen it covered in the Sun Times) and am a WBEZ member. While it is silly that these two protesters erroneously claimed that the event is not being covered by the media, it's equally inaccurate to cast everyone involved in this light.

I have appreciated NPR's thoughtful coverage of the protestors, especially this past week following the mass arrests in New York. It's been far superior to the other networks. I especially enjoyed the inclusion of the quote, 'a diverse group with diverse goals.'. Since these are the folks I spent many years with on a variety of causes prior to parenting and pastoring in a less urban area, I understand their difficulty in producing one unified document (like press releases), yet I feel NPR did find articulate folks to interview. Thank you for your efforts and keep them up!

Justin - the entire "Occupy Chicago/Wall Street" movement is based on vague, misplaced anger, misinformation and selfishness. It is nice to see that you've picked up on it regarding their attack on the media. Hopefully it will cause you (and others in the media) to look more carefully at their entire message, which suffers from the same lack of credibility.

What's your beef? That you have to do actual reporting? Jeez, grow up.

Harsh! And, coming from me, that's saying something.

Okay let's get into this:

@Dan - I felt that my response was not petulant. WBEZ doesn't look bad by calling it out. We are a transparent news organization. This blogger/columnist doesn't like when people make up stuff about us.Think of me as WBEZ's heavy. I think it's an interesting story (the 'you're ignoring us' rhetoric) as a new media strategy. Is this the new press release? That's lame.

And for the record @James Forster, I don't usually write stories off press releases. And I don't cover stories because you told me I suck for not doing it.

@Michael - True, I should not stereotype. We've probably had upwards of 15-20 tweets saying people are ashamed that WBEZ hasn't covered OccupyChicago. Not to mention FB comments. So it's more than two, but yes, it's not all. My bad.

@Bryan - I think that is a valid thought. But I do think there are many stories in this world that may be filled with misplaced anger and vagueness and they get told all the time. People are passionate about the issue of class warfare and financial haves/have nots. My only beef is with the way they are trying to get the media to tell their story.

@Mike - you grow up. Who says grow up anymore?

@MB - THIS is too harsh? Man, I must be growing soft in my old age. I've said plenty worse.

Yes, WBEZ is covering the protests. But, I think the complaints are generalized and refer to the overall media, which in my opinion is geared toward "soft news." One simply has to look at the amount of coverage given to Apple's ex-CEO. The public wants more coverage of things that actually matter to us. WBEZ is by far one of the better sources around for these stories, but there is always room for improvement-lately even WBEZ has a tendency to focus on GOP political celebrities.

With all due respect, Chris, Steve Jobs is why we are commenting via computer on this blog, so I do think his death was important. The "Occupy" story is *also* important--in fact, I would say that they are of equal importance, although neither WBEZ nor NPR should act as a bulletin board for the protestors. But saying that Steve Jobs' death is not important is negating the technological changes of the last two deacades and is the ultimate in Luddism. Perhaps you would like a more cartoonish "all corporations bad" view, in which case I suggest you listen to Amy Goodman on WZRD, WLUW or WRTE.

@Justin & Bryan - Misplaced Anger? Please correct me if I am wrong but was it not the Wall street irresponsible business practices that caused the collapse of the stock market in 2008 and sent our country into this “Great Recession”? Was it Wall street that received over a trillion dollars in tax payer money (both bailout & from the fed) to bail their criminal enterprises out? Wasn’t it Wall street (S&P in particular) that called junk bonds AAA and then sold them to teacher/police/fireman/your pension fund? Don't these cooperate entities, now considered people via Citizens United, spend vast sums of money lobbying our elected officials to get what they want despite the will or better good of the people. Haven't the banks acted criminally foreclosing on homes, including homes that were paid off and the bank didn't hold the loan on (see robo-signing), and are being sued by every attorney general in the country. Didn't it just come to light yesterday that the bank were cover charging veterans on home loans by burring illegal fees?

I don't think the anger is missplaced one bit. Our country is being destroyed by the .01% who only care about increasing the size of their bank account with no regard for anyone or anything. Should we all just sit at home whiles these people fill their pockets with our money and hope that they will grow a conscience? I don’t think the anger is misplaced at all but I do think their anger needs to grow to include congress, the white house and the Supreme court as they are guilty from not doing anything to prevent these criminal activities from happening again.

BK -- your argument for blaming wall street is misplaced. You act as if "Wall Street" both (a) operated with one voice and one goal; and (b) is all part of the top 1%. Neither is true. While you are correct that a very real problem was the rating agencies, I would hardly call them "Wall Street" as you are using the term. In fact, the rating agency employees are generally underpaid compared to the rest of Wall Street employees. Consider them part of the 99% -- or more realistically part of the 75%. If anything, rating agencies need to pay more to attract higher quality workers, but I sincerely doubt you are arguing for increased salaries.

As for blaming Wall Street for the investment vehicles (i.e. mortgage backed securities, etc.), the blame runs through all segments of our society. The MBSs were encouraged by well-meaning politicians so that more people could buy homes than otherwise would have been able to. The the sale level they were sold by middle class people to lower middle class people. Both of which had an incentive to misstate or omit key information in order to get the loan through. Blaming "Wall Street" for their actions does not absolve them as active participants. Those local banks then sold the mortgages to Freddie and Fannie -- a bank set up by politicians. Again, this is not on "Wall Street" or the investment banks.

Finally, the notion that the pensions were duped is beyond laughable. The people running the pensions do (and should) have all the same education, training and experience as the players in the investment banks. Your local teacher or fireman should not be in charge of making decisions for their pension -- that should be (and is) left to a professional. You simply cannot blame "Wall Street" for the pensions investing in these MBSs (and other products), when the people at the pensions are just as much "Wall Street." The fact is, a lot of people made a lot of bad decisions, but that does not mean anything criminal occurred. It is the naturals ebb and flow of the economy. Protesting this recession is like protesting death -- it will not do any good.