This is Dan Hodges' first contribution to the Total Politics blog. Every Friday he will be examining a campaign that's currently in the news and giving his assessment of it. Today he writes about his visit to Occupy LSX at St Paul's Cathedral.
Walk into the small, green Occupy London Stock Exchange media tent and the first person you come across is a banker. At least Liam Kirk claims to be a banker. “I work in banking,” he says, fixing me with a slightly over-intense stare.
Work in banking. As in currently employed in banking? Or formally employed in banking?
“I’m an investment banker.”
But are you actually working for a bank now? “I work in banking.” OK, which bank? “I’m not saying.”
Liam Kirk is a tough man to pin down. As are a number of his colleagues. And his movement in general.
I’ve come to talk to the Occupy LSX communications team about how they’re spinning their St Paul’s “occupation”. They are all very clear on this point; it’s an “occupation”. Personally, I’m not so sure that’s a media savvy description. Iraq or the Normandy coastline, fine. But St Paul's? When I finally meet a press officer I plan to tell them.
The trouble is, I can’t find one. “I’m not a press officer,” says Liam, “I’m a volunteer. I just came out for a pint of milk. And I stayed.” I’m not a hundred per cent sure I’m buying Liam’s milk-buying line. But for now I’ll take a steer from anywhere I can.
A young women enters the tent. She’s smartly dressed and wearing a yarmulke. Is she a press officer? “No. I’m from the Occupy Judaism movement. I’ve been told there’s someone here from the Jewish Chronicle. I’ve been asked to come down and be Jewish at him.”
Finding myself, not for the first time, too gentile for my own good, I turn back to Liam.
I need someone who can explain why Occupy LSX is here, and what they are trying to achieve. “I can do that,” he says. My heart rises. “I’d like to point you to two books.” It sinks again. “The Great Depression by Galbraith, and The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine by Michael Lewis.”
I consider telling Liam I was taught you should always get your press release to fit on one side of A4, and handing out whole books is pretty poor trade craft. Then I spot a newspaper sitting on the floor. It’s the Express, with the headline, “Banish The Hateful St Paul’s Rabble Now”. Occupy LSX is losing the communications war. And I’m beginning to understand why.
In desperation, I seize upon a young man standing at the tent’s entrance. Is he, by any chance, a press officer? “Well, I’m a volunteer.” Yes, we get that you haven’t all been press ganged. “But I suppose you could call me a sort of floating press officer.” Perfect. Levitate if you have to. You’ll do.
Andy Kenny, my floating press officer, can’t really give me quotes. But he can show me around, and let me see the camp. The camp itself has been described as a tented village, but it’s more of a small hamlet. The tents are fairly neatly arranged, in that form of organized chaos much beloved of the direct action movement.
What’s immediately noticeable is this is not a protest aimed at the banking system, it’s a protest aimed at every single injustice man has ever managed to perpetrate against his fellow man. And one or two injustices the most sadistic of his fellow men couldn’t even have dreamt of.
There are protestors against fuel poverty, police injustice and student fees. You can buy a copy of Socialist Worker, visit the Anarchist Book fair or visit the Queer Visibility Workshop. As I’m wrestling with my options a lady called Dianne approaches.
What are you protesting against Dianne? “Corruption.”
State? Capitalist? “Local authority. Southwark council. They defrauded me. They claimed it was an administrative error.”
I put it to Andy that to an outsider, the aims of him and his fellow occupiers seem somewhat diffuse. “Yes, they are a bit,” he concedes. “The problem is that as an organisation we’ve grown organically.”
He points me to a piece of cardboard which has nine points written down on it. This was the camp's initial ‘mission statement’. It’s illegible.
“It’s had its critics,” he says, “so were editing it. Refining it. This is too vague.”
I ask if he has a copy. He does, but he’ll only give me one if I put it into the appropriate context, and explain it’s being reworded. I explain I’m only too happy to do that, but it will mean quoting him. “Oh that’s fine,” he says. My press officer has returned to terra firma.
I’m shown the ‘Tea and Tranquility’ tent, the ‘International Commission’, which is a tent which is supposed to be used to communicate with fellow protestors abroad, but is now stuffed with equipment from an old sound system, and the ‘University’.
“Yesterday they were teaching five to ten-years-olds about politics and power," Andy informs me, “They loved it.” I think about how my five-year-old loves hitting me with his plastic light sabre.
I ask if I can interview some of the other occupiers. Andy says yes. The first girl I approach says she’s happy to talk; “But you’re not going to write anything bad are you? The press have written some bad things. You aren’t going to be asking me bad questions.” I won’t be asking any bad questions, I explain, but I’m not sure what I’ll be writing. “In that case, I’d rather not.” I ask another seven occupiers. They all politely refuse to speak to me.
I put it to Andy that the point of a protest is usually to try and get your mesage across to others. “Yeah, but it’s not unusual. A lot of people who attend these things don’t like talking to the press. We had the Telegraph here last night trying to find out how many people were actually sleeping out.” I tell him I also work for the Telegraph. He looks at me like I have five heads.
So why’s Andy here; in a sentence. “Hmmm. It’s not a one sentence job. OK. I’m protesting against government and the financial institutions.” And does he want to be a full-time occupier. “No,” he laughs, “it doesn’t really pay the bills, does it? I’d like to work in the music industry.”
A diminutive figure, wrapped in about fourteen scarves, approaches. “Hi I’m Naomi.” Naomi is a real press officer. I can tell by her professional, but not overly slick, demeanor. And by the fact that instead of dragging me towards the Tea and Tranquility tent, she guides me into Starbucks.
“This is basically our media headquarters,” she says, pointing to a room packed with earnest looking occupiers huddled over laptops and soya lattes. Critics of the Occupy movement have claimed local businesses are being hit. This one appears to be booming. Starbucks staff have been told not to comment on the occupation, but I check with the shop next door, and they confirm the world’s favorite barista is doing a roaring trade.
Naomi is the woman with the facts at her fingertips. Occupy has about eight press officers, but the nature of the movement provides its own management issues.
“People tend to drift in and then drift away,” she explains. “Also, because we’re not managed from the top down they tend to gravitate towards the things that interest them.”
Other problems would be recognisable to most traditional PROs. “Yeah we’ve got an issue with the website. There’s a bit of a dispute over who runs it. Whether it’s press or stand alone.”
Naomi thinks their press management has gone well: “We’ve managed to avoid most of the elephant traps people have put in front of us, and turn them around.” I wonder if I should tell her about the Express. Probably best not to.
So what exactly are Occupy trying to achieve with their media strategy? “It’s about showing we’re reasonable people. That we stand with the 99%. That we’re ordinary working people. That we’re not different to everyone else.”
But Naomi, let’s be honest. You haven’t done that have you? Most ordinary people think you lot are weirder than Ed Miliband. There’s a pause. “Look we accept there’s much more we need to do. But you have to remember, we’re part of a global movement. I know this sounds really pretentious, but we really think the moment’s with us.”
They all do. Naomi, Liam , Andy. They may be hopelessly out of touch and misguided. But in their own way, they are sincere. They believe what they’re fighting for. The problem is they just don’t know what that is.
So Naomi, the same question I’ve asked everyone else. Why are you, personally, here? “People have seen Egypt, the Arab spring, Greece. I want to be part of that. I know we’re not going to change things overnight. But I genuinely think there are two or three people in this camp, who have been with us, who will be inspired by what we’re doing, and will one day go on to do extraordinary things. Generate real change.”
It’s about the fifth or sixth different answer I’ve heard today. And the best.
Dan Hodges has worked on campaigns for Labour, the trade unions, private and charity sectors













Comments
Taylor / October 28 2011 12:03pm
All I can say is that if Liam Kirk is or was an investment banker, his career is unknown to Bloomberg.
Paul Hides / October 28 2011 12:18pm
Dan, you really are good at this stuff. The way you focus in on ad hominem attacks whilst making it look and sound like you're actually trying to cover an issue is so slick. You've got it down to a fine art. You even got a dig at Ed Milliband in there, is that nine articles in a row you've managed to either directly or indirectly kick him in the nuts? You really do make the protesters sound like a bunch of freeks who are completely out of touch with anything resembling reallity. Is that really the case? Are they ALL complete fruitcakes? Is there nothing we should direct at them but thinly veiled scorn? Oh well, there was me thinking that they kind of represented a beginning of a larger awakening to how utterly screwed by wealthy people the vast majority of us are. I must be wrong.
John / October 28 2011 1:40pm
Sincerity is no excuse for idiocy.
Every lunatic since the beginning of time who has ruined lives has been sincere.
RedMonkey / October 28 2011 1:49pm
Great read Dan.
Paul Hides - "there was me thinking that they kind of represented a beginning of a larger awakening to how utterly screwed by wealthy people the vast majority of us are."
Awakening? These people are in a walking coma, the majority can barely string a sentence together let alone come up with a coherent argument or line of attack. If anything the article forgives them their vagueness and give them multiple chances to correct it, at which they fail.
AndyN / October 28 2011 2:01pm
@ Paul Hides
Exactly where are the "ad hominem attacks" in this piece? Hodges has spoken to a number of people at the scene and found there to be little cohesion or specificity in the protestors' ideologies - which pretty much reflects the impression of the London/NewYork protest camps in reports from periodicals across the political spectrum.
Surely you're not suggesting Hodges ought to have "Hari-ed" the conversations he had with the protestors in order to make them appear more focused and articulate?
Nic / October 28 2011 2:06pm
I find it odd that an "anti-capatalist" movement would be providing so much business for Starbucks...
I am also shocked that protesters can actually compare what they are doing with the Arab spring uprisings against dictatorial regimes. Obviously politics in the UK is not perfect, but we are not really in the same league.
BenM / October 28 2011 4:14pm
Desperate stuff from Hodges.
So every protest movement should ensure a slick media strategy before they take to the streets?
Utterly Idiotic from someone fast becoming a laughing stock.
Johnnydub / October 28 2011 4:21pm
What gets my goat is they are campaigning on an anti-government ticket - but want they really want is more government - more public sector jobs, more benefits etc..
Yet our issues at the moment are caused by the government overspending, so their solution to this is more government spending?!?!?!
Ultimately they're a rabble who want to get the government to take money off other people and give it to them... Woohoo for freedom...
Jim rees / October 28 2011 5:51pm
Paul, Ed Millimong is a lying Douche bag in charge of the most deluded corrupt lying political party ever......though the protestors still dont believe liebour could ever introduce student fee's and top ups or take the country on illegal wars, bankrupt us whilst filling their own boots with cash and increase the gap between rich and poor....
apart from that, it was ED and Liebour who asked the statesman to sack dan Hodges because he told the truth about Liebours poor Party conference...so maybe dan is just getting his own back...
Who would believe, after the 13 year social experiment of failed socialism/bliarism....the left still dont like the truth or reality!
Jack / October 29 2011 10:32am
Hodges, you have a really uncomfortable style of reporting.
It seems you almost 'look down' on these people who are protesting for a better country. Maybe your life is perfect & you earn a good wage & believe you're well educated & perhaps you don't see any problems with this country worth fighting for (...or maybe you've been 'told' to put this negative spin on your article), but either way, it's unfair to negate so many people's strife in an article that may swell read as one sentence: 'Irrelevant smelly time wasters with no direction'.
But Dan, I do hope that if you ever find something worth fighting for, that you're not met with the same scepticism that you have provided for others.
David / October 29 2011 12:47pm
"People have seen Egypt, the Arab spring, Greece. I want to be part of that"
You'd think she'd thank her stars that she doesn't live under a brutal dictatorship. But no, she wants to imagine she dies. Disturbing..
Stewart / October 31 2011 3:45pm
"Weirder than Ed Miliband". Must. Turn. A. Phrase. I see what you were trying to do, Dan, I do. I can almost see the brief. But just not funny, or good. 3/10.
Stewart / October 31 2011 3:46pm
"Weirder than Ed Miliband". Must. Turn. A. Phrase. I see what you were trying to do, Dan, I do. I can almost see the brief. But just not funny, or good. 3/10.
Stewart / October 31 2011 3:46pm
"Weirder than Ed Miliband". Must. Turn. A. Phrase. I see what you were trying to do, Dan, I do. I can almost see the brief. But just not funny, or good. 3/10.
David Wearing / November 01 2011 10:07pm
"Most ordinary people think you lot are weirder than Ed Miliband". No, 51% support them. Hodges hasn't done his research, just recycling his boring, worthless prejudices as per usual.
http://www.icmresearch.com/1/files/2011/10/OmGuardian-BPC-oct11a.pdf
And they got a bad headline in the Express so they're "losing the communications war"? Hilarious.
I bet the Staggers are kicking themselves that they've lost this quality of analysis.
David Wearing / November 01 2011 10:14pm
Thing is, OccupyLSX has a clear, published set of demands.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/28/occupy-london-city-st-pauls
Now why does Dan fail to discuss or engage with that sensibly, in an article ostensibly about how hard it is to find out what the protesters want?
Is it because it doesn't fit the story that his prejudices demand that he must write, irrespective of the facts?
Or is it just journalistic incompetance?
Jules Evans / November 02 2011 6:01am
I think it's pretty rich to say Occupy LSX are losing the media war, based on an article in ...the Express!
Id say the Occupy global movement is hands down winning the media war. Ive seen supportive pieces in The FT and the Economist for Lords sake (OK, on the Economist blog), by Thomas Friedman of the NYT, by Andrew Rawnsley, by Mohammed El Erian (chief investor at Pimco), by the Archbishop of Canterbury....
Theyre not doing badly for a bunch of kids in tents!
The reason they have general public support is there is a general feeling of injustice at our economic system - and they're part of a push to change that system.
Dan's bio makes a big thing of his serious insider credentials - hes worked on campaigns for Labour, OK? Serious campaigns yeah? But there's no need to be quite so scornful of more grass roots campaigners - they have their place too, and we should admire their willingness to sacrifice their comfort for their beliefs.
Stuart Eels / November 04 2011 1:46pm
Dan
Good to see you back to what you do best!
I can't take seriously a tented protest group who sneak off home to a warm bed at night.
An occupier / November 12 2011 6:39am
*Sigh*. Let's try one more time from the top, to see if we can get through the media "framing".
Media version: What are they protesting about? Destruction of the environment, the banks, the cuts, privatisation of the NHS, the wars, the fractional reserve lending system, lawdy lawd, they don't even seem to know what their message is. They're protesting every injustice known to man! What a bunch of know-nothings!
Real life version: We're protesting corporate corruption of the democratic political process. That's it. That's all.
Why did we go to war in Iraq? A million people marched against it, and it made no difference, because corporate and arms-dealing lobbyists had already made the decision for us. Corporate corruption of politics.
Why is the environment being utterly destroyed? Because all of the environmental regulatory process is being transferred to private companies themselves and there's no profit in that. Fracking causes earthquakes and poisons aquifers - nobody wants this except the energy companies. Corporate corruption of politics.
The bailouts? Like Alessio Rastani pointed out on the BBC, politicians don't rule the world, Goldman Sachs does. Hedge fund managers are getting wildly rich from creating recessions. If we had a genuine democracy, this couldn't possibly happen. Corporate corruption of politics.
Do you seriously still not understand this? Then allow me to point out the corporate capture of the mainstream media, and the fact that people can write biased and idiotic opinion pieces and pass them off as "news", as long as it sells papers and pleases the advertisers.
Tina Louise / November 14 2011 10:58pm
I am an Occupier in London and I believe we came together because we each just refused to carry on down a road we didn't want to be on - for whatever our individual reasons. That we share a willingness to endure the conditions we do - unites us in our determination to address the problems we each confront.
No matter the differences between me and other occupiers - we each wake up on a cold hard ground in London because we believe there are solutions to be found. I don't think we can tell you what we want, but we can draw your attention to what is wrong, we can encourage a conversation about subjects previously kept quiet and we can work together with each other (as we are, in remarkable ways) to establish a real democracy within the group. This fledgling democracy has been a hard one to hatch but is evolving in surprisingly beautiful and simple ways.
We are indeed BEING the change we wish to see.
Visit us again Dan - we have grown up some more (still no title wearers, just individuals who fulfil established roles; when it suits, when it's needed. I am sometimes involved in media relations... as well as multiple other working groups from welfare to process :)
Tina Louise
Tina Louise / November 14 2011 11:37pm
I am an Occupier in London and I believe we came together because we each just refused to carry on down a road we didn't want to be on - for whatever our individual reasons. That we share a willingness to endure the conditions we do - unites us in our determination to address the problems we each confront.
No matter the differences between me and other occupiers - we each wake up on a cold hard ground in London because we believe there are solutions to be found. I don't think we can tell you what we want, but we can draw your attention to what is wrong, we can encourage a conversation about subjects previously kept quiet and we can work together with each other (as we are, in remarkable ways) to establish a real democracy within the group. This fledgling democracy has been a hard one to hatch but is evolving in surprisingly beautiful and simple ways.
We are indeed BEING the change we wish to see.
Visit us again Dan - we have grown up some more (still no title wearers, just individuals who fulfil established roles; when it suits, when it's needed. I am sometimes involved in media relations... as well as multiple other working groups from welfare to process :)
Tina Louise