First of all, this post will say nothing about your organization, your movement, your issues, your objectives, your rightness or wrongness, nor your methods. It appears you're gaining some traction, which is terrific.
But I've heard lots of people complain in the last few weeks about a lack of media coverage. These folks are right in one sense -- the mainstream media took a while to pick up on what you're doing. However, the media being what it is these days, it is your responsibility to get your story into the press.
Complaining about lack of coverage is kinda like throwing 96-mile-per-hour fastballs in your backyard, telling no one about it, and complaining when the Yankees don't offer you a contract.
Now, there are some of you who maybe don't care about media coverage, and that's fine, and there are others who want media coverage but not enough to actually do anything to get more. And that's fine too.
But for those of you interested in having your story told, on your terms, on the front pages of the papers ... a few notes.
The media, bless their hearts, need a nicely packaged narrative with:
- Two (and preferably only two) clearly defined "sides"
- A conflict between those two sides that can be summed up in one sentence
- Clear objectives that would mean victory for each side
- A plotline: a beginning, a middle and a foreseeable end.
For some guidance, let's look at the example of the #wiunion protests. Many have noted similarities between you, Occupy Wall Street, and the Wisconsin union folks. The Wisconsin protests, unlike yours, got good coverage. Why?
- Two sides. Scott Walker vs. the Unions. (Or, Fitzwalkerstan vs. the workers.)
- Conflict: Collective bargaining rights are terrible! No, they're essential!
- Clear objectives: Walker wants to end collective bargaining to "balance the budget;" unions want to retain their rights.
- Plotline: Radical bill introduced; Protests ensue; Senators dramatically flee the state; more huge protests; intricate subplots involving access to the Capitol and so on; and all along, the story is going to end one of two ways: the bill is killed, or it is not.
You guys finally put out a statement over the weekend with a long list of wrongs done unto America by corporations, all of which are true. But still ... this morning's AP story says you "lack a clear objective" and the Washington Post headline is "What does 'Occupy Wall Street' want?" So even the coverage you are getting is kinda sucky coverage. And here's why.
- Two sides: No one knows who the two sides are. I know you don't want to label yourselves, but for the media you kinda have to. Are you liberals? Socialists? Libertarians? And who is the other side? "Corporations?" That's far too vague for the media to grasp. You might think about naming one or two in a more concerted way. Point to specific wrongs they have committed.
- Conflict: You, a not-very-well-defined collective of very energetic people, are up against "corporate greed," an abstract concept. Or against "corporations," of which there are thousands in many places around the world.
- Clear objectives: What do you want, exactly? And awareness isn't enough. It's never enough -- not to get press coverage, anyway. You need to give the press some specific objective -- some specific thing you're after. Even if it's some minor, arbitrary thing -- you want the CEO of Merrill Lynch to take a 50% pay cut, or return his bonus, or you want Congress to repeal corporate personhood, or something -- and even if you don't achieve that goal, it gives the media something to grab onto. Then, you get coverage, and that's where your awareness comes from.
- Plotline: The media don't know exactly why this thing started. Many don't even know when, exactly, it started. And because the media don't know who/what you're up against, specifically, and don't know what you want, specifically, they won't be able to tell when you've won. Or when you've lost. They can't see a plot structure, which makes them uncomfortable.
Again, I know many of you are going to say "the media is just a corporate tool and they won't do the work themselves and they just don't want to tell our story." And that's maybe all true, except for the last part. They do want to tell your story. They love conflict, but only easily defined conflict in the context of an easy-to-tell storyline.
So as I see it you have three options: keep doing what you're doing and not worry about the press at all; keep doing what you're doing and keep complaining that the press isn't paying attention; or keep doing what you're doing and attach a narrative to it that the press can grab onto.
I'm not going to tell you what to do. But if you do choose Door Number 3, at least you'll have some idea how to go about it.
