Occupy Wall Street protesters shut down 'Law & Order: SVU' set depicting OWS

[RamboLiberal]

Source: NY Daily News

More than 100 Occupy Wall Street demonstrators stormed the set for “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” across from the Manhattan State Supreme Courthouse, shutting down production of an OWS-themed episode.

"We made it so that they could not exploit us and that's awesome," said Tammy Schapiro, 29, of Brooklyn.

The protesters arrived around midnight at Foley Square and roamed around the park inspecting tents and signs built by the production company.

"This is not us," said Drew Hornbein, 24, of Brooklyn Heights. "We are not part of corporate TV America."



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/occupy-wall-street-...

[FirstLight]

1. Man....

That's fuckin' beautiful! :salute:

[Roy Rolling]

119. ?

Having 20+ years in movies and TV let me just make this one point without taking sides: in all likelihood, the signs and tents scene will be shot on a soundstage or another location. Disrupting this one location will not force the production company to abandon the episode nor does it free OWS from being the subject of the episode.

I have never watched the show, but that is how episodic TV deals with such location-related disruptions.

[SemperEadem]

138. their "ripped from the headlines" business model illustrates

their lack of good writing. The show has become so formulaic that it's a joke now.

I was wondering how long before their unimaginative writers were going to rip off OWS and work in some kind of deviant sexual crime story line
and paint the OWS with that.

[LiberalFighter]

160. I agree. They tend to do the abnormal and more unrealistic that for the most part are rare events.

[RaleighNCDUer]

172. What it WILL do is almost certainly guarantee that OWS will not be

portrayed in a favorable light.

REWRITE!

[quakerboy]

188. Because that was ever an option?

On a show about sex crimes, the more outrageous or heinous the better, on a show where the cops are always the good guys, even when it means the have to take down fellow cops, even when they bend the law a little.

The coverage was never going to be good.

[Edweird]

2. Awesome!

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. "Odd" isn't the word.

>>>"It's hysterical," Hornbein said. "Two weeks ago they kicked us out of Zuccotti Park. Now they have this set trying to pretend it’s us. It's odd.">>>>>

[deutsey]

29. Just wait another 20 years

They'll probably have a Williamsburg-like replica of Liberty Square set up there that tourists will have to pay in order to gain access. And with the right tour package, they can even join the paid re-enactors in a real-life General Assembly that will give them a sense of what democracy used to be like.

[Turbineguy]

128. The

American Museum of Democracy. They can put it next to Antiquities.

[janet118]

91. Not so odd . . .

television shows like to distort and ridicule what they don't understand or condone . . . check out the "hippies" and "protesters" on Dragnet, Law & Order's predecessor in pro-fascist TV.

[Lars77]

131. Or what about Dirty Harry, the ultimate revenge fantasy of the silent majority

The Zodiac Killer depicted in Dirty Harry is a hippie, although the real guy probably wasnt.

[Ken Burch]

183. Actually, the Dirty Harry killer in the original

looked more like the late 60's-era Van Morrison on a REALLY bad day.

[Seedersandleechers]

Dragnet Blue Blue episode comes to mind

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xdkmoi_anti-drug-episo...

[dmr]

180. I think they confused the characters, many of them looked more

like beatniks than hippies.

[Ken Burch]

184. The "Blue Boy" looks like a Cal fan

right after Stanford wins the Big Game.

[Smarmie Doofus]

179. +1. I remember. n/t

[DissedByBush]

187. It is odd they'd go against Law & Order SVU

That is a pretty liberal TV show.

Richard Belzer, one of my old-time favorite comedians, is very left in his politics, and it often comes out in the show.

Watch it, his often snide and sarcastic remarks against right-wing hypocrisy and heartlessness are priceless.

[Matariki]

94. the "they" used twice in his sentence are two sets of people.

[sabrina 1]

4. Good for them. Where was Bloomberg when those tents

were put up?? What a total hypocrite he is, and good for the protesters for not allowing them to use them like that.

[No Elephants]

47. +1 Bloomberg is turd.

[Sherman A1]

5. Excellent!

Good for them. The movement should not be exploited for profit, that said SVU still has a pretty good audience, takes on controversial topics and one wonders if the coverage might not have been beneficial?

[No Elephants]

48. I don't think there is much to wonder about.

[Downtown Hound]

124. Law and Order attempted to do the RNC 2004 debacle in one of their episodes

It was a farce. It ended with D.A Jack McCoy finishing his report on who was to blame for the violence at a protest and being asked the question, "So what do you think, police riot?"

McCoy then says in his tough take no nonsense voice, "I'll tell you what. Neither side will be happy with me."

His starry eyed assistant then smiles and says, "Well, sounds like you got it right."

This type of small minded thinking is typical for privileged Hollywood entertainment writers. They think that reading a few articles and dressing them up in dramatic fashion and then coming to rather simplistic conclusions based on cursory analysis is the same thing as carefully examining social issues. It isn't.

In reality, at the 2004 RNC in New York, more than 1800 people were arrested, most of them on bogus charges. It was proven by amateur video that many police officers actually got up on stand and committed perjury to convict activists, saying that they had been violent when the video proved they weren't. I didn't see any of those types of things being discussed in this Law and Order episode. It was all just, "Well the protesters did some things wrong, and the police did some things wrong." Now let's move on.

I don't want OWS getting that same kind of treatment from this bullshit show.

[truedelphi]

171. Plus recently, SVU lets the Corporate Scientists get their message across.

There will be the usual court room drama going on, and then the "expert witness" will be asked if they can "prove" this or that, and when the expert witness says, "No." the expert witness doesn't add, "but there are serious indications that the scenario I am discussing is real."

This subconsciously reinforces what the scientific world of Big Pharma and Big Pesticide industries want reinforced.

If you cannot absolutely prove something, then no need to worry, is the reinforced message from industry

Even though, a real scientist knows that taking indications into account is a valuable thing to do.

For instance, in the late sixties, Koop saw to it that warnings were put on the cigarette boxes and cartons. Though "absolute proof", established by examining nicotine's effects on DNA, did not arrive until late nineties.

[caseymoz]

6. Hurray! One thing OWS does not need is an SVU plot.

You know that would have been about sexual assault at OWS.

But they needed to shut fictionalizations down regardless.

[ObaMania]

7. That was my first thought. n/t

[caseymoz]

136. You know, I've had second thoughts about this.

As offensive as SVU might be, and my immediate reaction is to be offended by this fictionalization of the movement for commercial purposes, the Occupiers should be tolerant of free speech, as tolerant as they expect the police and city to be.

Besides, even after they found the guy, the sexual assault did occur.

They were wrong for this. It was probably the first big mistake the movement has made, and I'm guilty of it, too.

[me b zola]

10. I have found that the law and order franchise has a pro-corporate agenda

I have seen more than 2 separate shows where they threw in anti-climate change impromptu rants for no particular reason.

OWS did well to keep Law & Order's filthy mouth off of them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. They have also aired plenty of episodes about corrupt cops

The theme is 'straight from the headlines' so it's not surprising they did an OWS show.

[caseymoz]

135. Corrupt cops is still government.

So, that's something that doesn't really offend either side.

However, L&O doesn't tend to be politically even-handed. What I notice is they make enviro-terrorists or liberal activists the perps, probably just because they perceive it to be topical or unusual, and for no other reason.

I'm thinking L&O:SVU were doing the story about the sexual assault that did occur. If Occupy gets any fictional publicity, why would that event get chosen of all others?

[sabrina 1]

147. Good question. Why not do a segment on the near murders

of Iraq Veterans Scott Olsen and Kayvan Sabeghi? That would be a riveting story, especially since the perps have yet to be id'd and no charges have been filed.

How about the guy who drove into the protesters, hospitalizing at least two of them, who was not arrested and who may have been a cop??


Or the pepper spraying of the woman in the wheelchair and elderly woman who was nearly trampled to death and again, no perps arrested for these criminal attacks on the American people.

Focusing on this one incident alone is meant to discredit the movement. Did they have the permission of the woman btw? Airc she dropped the charges.

[elleng]

153. My experience differs, re: corporate agenda.

Generally pro-people, recognizing great varieties of interests.

[99th_Monkey]

8. Those 100 patriots of the highest order, chose very wisely where to invest their energy & $$. ~nt

[me b zola]

9. Everyone go to link

Besides a really cool video, there's a poll to take

[Ilsa]

26. 39% approve of OWS' actions. 61% say they are interrupting

artistic expression and disapprove.

[No Elephants]

49. Online polls are sooooooo meaningful.

[sulphurdunn]

120. Artistic Expresson?

SVU?

[sibelian]

165. Artistic cockcheese.

SVU - artistic expression? Feh.

[markpkessinger]

177. If you want to talk about "disruption" . . .

. . . Let me tell you how "disruptive" to city residents film and television crews can be. I have lived in NYC for nearly thirty years. About fifteen years ago, the city relaxed its restrictions on film crews, granting substantially more permits to film on city streets. It is not uncommon to walk out of the front door of one's apartment building to find that the entire block is now a film set. And if you happen to be leaving your building, or coming home, just the crew is filming a scene, too bad for you, you have to wait until the end of the take. And you have to contend with the trailers for cast and crew, cables all over the place, etc. So frankly, I'm not too concerned if a set is disrupted.

[Quartermass]

11. So much for free speech.

[Wilms]

12. For corporations? n/t

[peace frog]

17. But but but,,,,corporations are people!!11!!

[Callisto32]

121. Corporations are people too.

Legally.

Sorry, the government (the largest, most corrupt corporation of them all) made it that way.

Guess you just have to deal with it.

[fascisthunter]

133. We are Dealing with It

get used to that...

[Callisto32]

151. What?

I hate the modern corporate system.


The government creates an entity that allows you to avoid liability for your actions, thus insulating people from the consequences of their actions. The government won't save you from its own creations.....

[caseymoz]

152. If not the corporations, how about the writer and director?

I now think the Occupiers made a mistake restraining this, as obnoxious as SVU might have been. In the position their in, their support for free speech has got to be unwavering, with as few "buts" and caveats as possible.

[sibelian]

164. What utter nonsense.

Why should they allow others to make any representation of them at all? I say good luck to them.

[caseymoz]

173. Free speech? You know, exactly OWS' argument with the cities over their camps?

I'll tell you, OWS is making a grave mistake here. And I mean one that may cost them any turn of public sympathy in their favor, and that's so important in this struggle.

And, yes, my own first reaction was, "Yeah! Take that SVU." Until I thought about this. They can't afford to be seen suppressing anybody else's speech.

And even if it's a heartless, soulless corporation behind it, the writer and director are creative people and they have their names on it.

[lunatica]

13. LOL!

What are you talking about? That people should allow themselves to be exploited by corporate networks who produce fictionally based shows because they'd be violating the corporate right to free speech?

[patrice]

52. Besides which, something that DEPENDS upon exploitation isn't free anything in the first place.

[Tunkamerica]

20. you're being vague

[WilliamPitt]

39. (facepalm) with a side of (headdesk)

[AngryAmish]

43. Michael Moore forms corporations to make his movies

Would it be ok to shut him down?

[No Elephants]

62. Which legitimate movements does Moore discredit through fictionalization again?

[AngryAmish]

85. Who decides which are legitimate movements?

If the answer is me, then that is cool. If the answer is not me, then I got a problem with that.

[Vinnie From Indy]

111. Ya know there is a very easy solution to your lament.

Simply do not join those movements that do not give you complete control over the goals, strategies and principles that guide the collective. Have fun alone in your sandbox! There is nothing wrong with that! Cheers!

[No Elephants]

51. "Here we go."

Big Bang Theory.

[patrice]

54. OWS freed them from their dependence upon exploitation. They are now free to PAY for making a profit

off of OWS.

[SammyWinstonJack]

Nice try.

[SammyWinstonJack]

61. dupe

[Pacifist Patriot]

96. Considering no government entities are involved on either side, not sure what your point would be.

[Demeter]

14. So OWS Isn't Good Enough for the News, but It's Okay as Mind Candy Pretext?

I feel very conflicted...

on the one hand, it is tacit acknowledgment that OWS is mainstream and here to stay.

on the other, it's a cheap, pointless ripoff of a very important social movement.

But I guess conflict is the heart and soul of it.

[lunatica]

15. I'm not conflicted at all since Law & Order is not a news show

It's a fictionally based drama with writers and actors and sets and scripts. The writers and producers may take their stories from real news, but they aren't a news show.

Where's the conflict?

[Demeter]

16. Here's the dilemma

Pride that they noticed, pique that they disrespect.

[lunatica]

18. It's a show about sexual predators and victims

If you were there would you really feel conflicted? I understand your reasoning regarding pride of being noticed. And there's probably truth in that since the OWS has to be noticed to succeed, but I don't see a conflict such as questioning themselves about what they stand for. Principle should trump pride, even though one can feel both.

I think it would be the kind of pride that comes from feeling victory at being noticed. It shows the OWS is a resounding success as an organization whose stated purpose is to bring truth into people's consciousness. It would be more like chalking one up for the 99% and another small defeat for the 1%.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. And you know the plot would have involved a sexual assault

And the assaulter would have been an OWS protester.

I'm a long time SVU viewer. Glad to see OWS shut them down.

[MadrasT]

109. How do we know that?

The *victim* could have been an OWS protester.

I guess my opinion of the whole thing would depend on how the episode was written.

It could have been awesome to bring the OWS conversation more into the mainstream.

But if an OWS protestor was depicted as the assaulter, that would have been a disaster.

I like the spirit of the folks who shut 'em down though! "Oh NO you DON'T!!!"

[proud2BlibKansan]

113. Because I've watched the show since it first came on the air

Just a hunch though

[Owlet]

21. Yeah, I'm with you. On the other hand...

"There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary."

Brendan Behan
Irish author & dramatist (1923 - 1964)

As stated earlier, a dilemma.

[Bluenorthwest]

32. Witty yet inaccurate as it is dated as hell

I always say those who claim there is no such thing as bad press are people who never got much press. Do you think that say, Herman Cain would agree that all press is good press? Hugh Grant? Paul Rubens? The list is endless....

[No Elephants]

53. Yeah, the Catholic Church was so thrilled about all kinds of publicity that

for as long as it could get it away with it, it paid victims thousands to STFU.

If Behan were spot on, there would be no point trying to blackmail anyone and no such expression as "hush money."

[KansDem]

83. "It's a fictionally based drama with writers and actors and sets and scripts. "

Sounds like FOX News!

[unionworks]

19. K&R Law and Order is

Like most of the cop shows that have been around since Reagan - designed in a very sneaky, subtle way to promote fear and authority worship in the minds. Of the boob tube viewers. Good for OWS!

[mucifer]

22. There is a poll on the link about whether you aprove of the OWS protester's actions.

[MrMickeysMom]

23. YES!

[geckosfeet]

24. Amazing people - continue to amaze.

[kaffy4x4]

27. SUV

is a program about sex offenders and child sexual crime, what do you think they would use the Occupy camp for in their program? Of course the protesters were right to shut it down. There would be no reason to have the Occupy camp in any shot unless the "perp" was in the camp, the crime happened at the camp or near the camp and they were looking for witnesses who did nothing...that is a message people, one that is horrible.

[randome]

40. Hilarious.

You have no idea what the story was about but because it MIGHT portray OWS in an unfavorable way, you are in favor of shutting it down.

Same old, tired tripe.
"You are either with us or against us."
"All or nothing."
"Show us your loyalty papers."

It was bad enough when the hunger strike started. OWS members turning against themselves. Now the point of OWS is to demonstrate in favor of...OWS.

More protests against Washington. More election participation. Everything else is just a sideshow.

[No Elephants]

55. Have you made a single post here about OWS that is not passive aggressive or negative?

[randome]

58. Yes, I have.

I have repeatedly said I think OWS has made a positive contribution to the conversation about inequality and the stupid economic situation we find ourselves in.

I wish some of that energy and enthusiasm was directed at more worthwhile targets than hunger strikes and park sit-ins.

It's a damned shame to see time and resources wasted on crap like this.

Marches on Washington. Election support. Those are the ONLY things that will make a difference. (Other than armed insurrection.)

[No Elephants]

65. Actually, you could barely concede that had changed the national conversation SOME

after I pointed out that OWS had done that.

BTW, you don't get to decide what constitutes a worthwhile target unless you are involved yourself.

Oh, and OWS has marched on Washington.

Disagree that election support will make more of a difference than OWS.

IMO it's a damned shame to see time wasting on posts that undermine OWS.

[Occulus]

60. SVU is about sexual assault.

Always was, always has been, always will be. That's the premise of the show.

I've seen lots of episodes of SVU. They tend to follow news events of one sort or another. Given that there was a "protection tent" for the women of one of the OWS protests, and given that there were a couple sexual assaults reported at one of them, and given the current-events nature of any reference to OWS, it does not require a magic spell, flow chart, or cereal box dessert recipe for us to put two and two together to get to the most likely conclusion: the victim, rapist, or both would have been someone from their version of OWS (since OWS isn't a brand name, they may even have used the actual acronym).

Why am I so sure? Because that's what SVU does, in almost every episode. On both that and its parent show, the now-defunct original series, actual news stories are used as a backdrop for the crime du jour. In fact, not to put too fine a point on it, but one of the parent show's later episodes used members of a website very much like Free Republic.

I guess you just have to have seen the show to make the connection. Regardless, I'm about 95% certain OWS would not have been painted in a good light.

[randome]

64. In oher words, the show mirrors reality.

So that's what this particular OWS group was upset about.

Look, I don't even watch bullshit shows like SVU or whatever it is. I just want all that OWS energy and enthusiasm to be directed at more cogent targets.

[No Elephants]

66. Then get involved.

[No Elephants]

67. Then get involved.

[randome]

72. I'm involved here.

A discussion forum can sometimes be useful to spreading the word.

Do me a favor and spread the word that stunts like hunger strikes, park sit-ins and studio protests do not do a THING to rectify the horrible economic situation we are in.

[No Elephants]

73. No, I won't spread things that I believe are incorrect. And, by the way, posting does NOT

buy you the right to decide what OWS "should" be doing with its time and its own resources, even if you were correct, which you aren't.

[randome]

77. I have as much right to say what I think OWS should be doing

as anyone else.

I think OWS represents a tremendous opportunity but it is being frittered away in pointless stunts like this one.

[No Elephants]

82. And I have a right to say you have no right to shit on what OWS is doing every chance you get

and call it honest discussion.

If you think something should be done, start your own movement. If you think OWS should do something differently, get involved. Otherwise, it's bs.

[U4ikLefty]

148. He is "too busy" to start his own movement.

Hippies like me are the ones who do such things.

[DocMac]

102. You mean stunts like that guy in Egypt

that set himself on fire and started the Arab Spring?

[kenfrequed]

158. Nonsennse.

A discussion forum is not about "getting involved." It is about spreading memes and the memes you seem to attach to tend to be anti-OWS. There is absolutely no way that LAW and Order was going to contribute a positive OWS story, particularly with their Special Victims Unit.


But let's think more about the theoretical nature of the show. It is yet another in a long list of crime shows that: Deals primarily with street crime or violent crime (rather than white collar crime). It suggests the police do not really arrest the wrong person, and when they do it is all cleared up within an hour. It suggests that the DA usually only prosecutes guilty people, and if they don't it is, again, cleared up within an hour.

And that is the typical of the regular show. SVU is all sex offense, all the time. I don't know how this is a "mirror" to the OWS movement as it has nothing to do with what the cause is. It has nothing to do with even the primary cause of injury or hospitalization of the people protesting. It isn't a damned mirror at all unless someone gets most of their information from Fox News. If the only story you are willing to tell about a massive, national, committed movement, is about a rape that takes place then it really isn't much of a story at all.

[zeemike]

115. And that is how the media influences perceptions.

You look at the program "24" came out at the perfect time to justify the torture that Bush and Cheney did to provide justification for it.
They control the perceptions of minds of many people with that

[Pacifist Patriot]

97. Based on the foundational premise of the show, it's a reasonable assumption to make.

[sibelian]

167. Absolutely.

There's no reason to give them free pass.

[Sedona]

30. TV Shows and Films made in the US

are one of the last bastions of union labor in the Western US.

The crews are well paid and have good benifits and retirement.

Its hard fucking work and they are compensated better than most. But they don't get paid unless they're working.

OWS basically shut down a union shop.

The teamsters, writers, directors, grips, electricians, craft services, set decorators, makeup & costomers,

actors (even the extras), everyone are union labor and I'm afraid

OWS shot themselves in the foot on this one.

I'd like to know more before I come to a conclusion.

I think perhaps the members of OWS who shut down that show may have reacted before thinking it through.

Who's to say the episode wouldn't be sympathetic to OWS?

[RevStPatrick]

31. You've gotta be fucking kidding me!

That's what you got out of this incident?

It's a fucking TV machine show about sex crimes.
It's dirty corporate fear propaganda that shouldn't be on the air in the first place, that was trying to exploit a movement for positive social change. And you're worried about the gaffers losing a day's pay?

[Roy Rolling]

34. No, not kidding

Shutting the show down before knowing what the episode was about was premature. If the episode was about an OWS protester being pepper-sprayed by over-zealous cops then shutting down the show does harm to the movement's attempt to get the message out via the media and raise awareness of the issues.

I don't know either way, but acting witout knowing is reckless.

[RevStPatrick]

38. They don't do episodes about protesters being pepper sprayed.

They do episodes about sex crimes.

And no, it's not reckless to keep this movement from being a backdrop to corporate profit-making shallowness. People are so accustomed to everything in this life being fodder for TV fictionalizations, that it just doesn't occur to way too many people that it just ain't cool to do that. It doesn't help. It's not going to "raise awareness," it's going to put advertising dollars into already wealthy people's pockets. The gaffers will work again tomorrow.

NO EXPLOITING THE OWS MOVEMENT FOR CORPORATE PROFITS!!!

That's not all that difficult to understand.

[patrice]

46. 1+++

[Roy Rolling]

69. here's what is difficult to understand

You nor anyone cannot control what the media says about OWS. How much corporate exploitation has been stopped on the Fox News Network? Or any network....they have made millions covering the OWS movement. This meaningless symbolic act does not mean OWS is not exploited by corporate media at all. You are attaching a meaning that is not a cause and effect, is is simply one small event---while the OWS is written about, filmed, and talked about (exploited) thousands of times a day---you nor anyone has not stopped that.

If, however, the episode was favorable to the OWS then shutting it down caused OWS to miss an opportunity to tell their story---information is not just exchanged via news shows anymore.

My point is that to shut down production without knowing is a knee-jerk and ineffective solution. OWS is seeking effective solutions for change, not solutions that simply piss people off. That is what they are fighting against.

It is the difference between destroying an asset or taking that asset and using it for the good purposes of OWS.

Again, I say, I don't know what the episode is about---I have not ever watched even ONE episode of this despicable show. I'm just saying that to act without knowing is bad policy and will create negative media exploitation as the news media portrays the act negatively---which is an almost 100% certainty.

[Uncle Joe]

98. "Law and Order" is not a strong advocate of the First Amendment, they've openly trashed it

on earlier episodes so I highly doubt their show would project the OWS Movement in a positive light.

They're part of the corporate media; this institution/trust/monopoly consisting of six mega corporations owning 90+% of everything the American People see on television, hear on the radio, read in papers and magazines, at least up until the very recent past with the rise of the Internet, has been the major propaganda bulwark supporting the decades long rise of corporate supremacy and subliminal class war against the American People.

This propaganda doesn't just occur on "news" programs it happens in everyday programming as they continually criminalize the American People in one fashion or another, I believe OWS was correct in separating itself by action from one of the prime culprits.

[sibelian]

166. "I have not ever watched even ONE episode of this despicable show"

Then you're in no position to take moral stances regarding how others react to being it's unwilling subject matter, are you?

Ridiculous.

[No Elephants]

59. How do you know they didn't know what the episode was about?

Besides, special victims unit is about the heroes of the show--the police-- investigating sex crimes, not about police villains wrongfully using pepper spray on demonstrators.

[dotymed]

37. As a Union member, I completely agree, Rev.

Using OWS in a sexual assault fictionalization is unacceptable.

Having said that, "the show must go on." So, I am pretty sure that all of these Union employees will probably get overtime pay setting up a new set. I hope that they do not re-create another OWS encampment. Hopefully they will ask their Union writers to come up with an alternative show.

GO OWS!

[WildEyedLiberal]

130. Yes, rape = "fear propaganda"

Why do all these silly wimminz issues have to get in the way of important things like OWS?

[RevStPatrick]

145. I'm really not sure what you mean by that.

Unfortunately, text on internet discussion forums is not good at subtlety.
I have a feeling that we probably agree on most of this stuff.
But I just can't tell if one or both of us is having a misunderstanding...

[Uncle Joe]

157. It's fear propaganda when you compare the % of violent crime; murder, rape robbery programs

telecast on a daily basis by the television networks as compared to the actual crime rate % of the general population.

The % of violent crime programming is much greater and I believe distorts the American People's perception by magnifying fear and subliminally works to criminalize the people.

Furthermore I believe the brainwash programming works to become a self-fulfilling prophecy as fear and distrust become the focal points, punitive, draconian punishment becomes more politically palatable in such an environment and prisons serve as teaching schools of crime, if you're not a hardened criminal when you go in, you're more likely to be one when you come out.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. As a long term professional in those Unions allow me to calm

your concerns. Everyone called to work gets paid, work or no. A set up that gets cancelled, such as this one, or for weather reasons, or due to one cast member not being present is not at all unusual, and in most cases will not cost so much as a half day's shoot. Any show shooting on NY Streets is going to be adept at making quick changes. You can not call Union members to work and just send them home unpaid if you have some trouble with your day.
A running series will continue to run. No 'shop' was shut down, work was interrupted and that's all. I have, in fact, shut down a set I was working on, by joining the Teamster pickets on my breaks. So I and others like me do to our own what OWS did to our own. Are we 'shooting ourselves in the foot'?
Most of what you say is not correct. They did not 'shut down that show'. They disrupted work on one scene. That is not the same thing. At all. No one lost pay. No show was shut down. They no doubt moved and shot other things.
The Union workers on that set are most certainly supportive of OWS. They would see this inconvenience (and that is all it is) as part of the time and place we live in, and most of those workers have themselves walked months long picket lines, disrupted shooting and done their damnedest to make change and justice.

[Eljo_Don]

41. workers

Policemen are workers too. But they do the dirty job against OWS.

[No Elephants]

56. Another, "OWS is wrong on this ONE" post.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

175. Bingo.

Why don't they protest Fox News instead?

[Roy Rolling]

33. Exploitation NO...Good PR YES

I hope OWS had some insight into the script that it unfairly depicted OWS before they shut down production. If the script was a fair portrayal of the protest then they missed a great opportunity for good PR.

For example, if the script was about how the police and city unfairly ousted the protesters, then shutting down the episode was a bone-headed move and stupid.

[No Elephants]

68. That is not the kind of story SVU does.

[Odin2005]

35. Good! I bet they were making an episode with an OWSer being the rapist!

[randome]

42. Or they MIGHT have been.

Best to shut everything down just in case.

[No Elephants]

71. best not to ever give OWS credit for anything, even possibly knowing the plot of the

episode they were shutting down. '

Because that is how "honest disagreement" about OWS works, right, randome?

[randome]

74. Even knowing the plot doesn't excuse spending time shutting down a studio.

It's a stupid, Grade-D crime show, for Christ's sake!

Why waste time on this when millions of people are STILL out of work?

I don't get why so many OWS members want to do anything -ANYTHING- other than to tackle the unjust situation we find ourselves in.

[No Elephants]

84. Who has OWS put out of work? What have you invested in OWS that you shit on it

whenever you see an OWS thread?

The government brought this recession on us and you have invested tax money in that. What don't you take your bile out on the government? You have every right to do that.

And we don't get why you waste your time on so many anti-OWS posts rather than doing something constructive yourself.

[snooper2]

137. So you think the producers won't follow through and do the episode they want?

[patrice]

44. When will people unerstand that privilege isn't "free speech" because it DEPENDS upon weakness.

(Weakness is what makes privilege privilege, without weakness there would be no privilege, ergo privilege is in no sense free.)

[patrice]

45. Ergo, OWS's show of strength LIBERATED Law and Order SVU.

[Zorra]

50. "We are not part of corporate TV America." nt

[No Elephants]

75. +1

[SammyWinstonJack]

57. hehehe

[Eric J in MN]

63. Badly written news article.

Unclear which happened first: police announcing that TV permit was canceled or protesters walking around the set.

[rethymnon]

70. OWS = Fail

So now the OWS dipshits are raging against Law and Order?

Would they please go away. They've had their cathartic temper tantrum and now they're just embarrassing the progressive movement.

If you want change, elect more democrats. More good will come from a significant democratic majority than any OWS nonsense.

[No Elephants]

76. LOL!

[Douglas Carpenter]

79. yes, the OWS ONLY brought income disparity and economic equity into mainstream discussion for

the first time in more than a generation. Something the Democratic Party lost interest in more than a generation ago.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Douglas Carpenter]

110. voting will not make ANY difference whatsoever unless you change the political discussion

The New Deal only become possible after agitation in the streets created a political climate in which politicians paid attention to the demands of labor and it became possible to vote into office politicians who would carry through those demands - something respectable politicians would not do at an earlier time before the political conversation had changed. The civil rights movement did not begin with voter registration drives. Voter registrations drives only became relevant after mass action created a political culture where it became possible to elect politicians who would carry forward the demands of the civil rights movement - something respectable politicians would not do at an earlier time before the political discussion had changed. And most certainly the gay rights movement did not begin with voter registration drives - Voting only became relevant after agitation and resistance created a political climate in which politicians paid attention to the demands of the gay rights movement and it became possible to vote into office politicians who would would carry through those demands - something respectable politicians would not do at an earlier time before the political culture had changed.

If one is actually serious about wanting to break the stranglehold the financial industry holds over both political parties - it is most certainly not going to happen and respectable politicians are not going to willingly cut-off their own supply of dependable financial support that they really do need in order to get elected - until the political culture changes and public demand forces a situation where respectable politicians have no choice but to break from the stranglehold the financial industry holds over both political parties.

Already only a few weeks into this great new movement something is happening - The issues of Wall Street's stranglehold over government as well as the issue of vast income disparity has moved from the fringes only voiced by the ravings of leftist and malcontents into the mainstream of political discussion. This is truly incredible. Even Forbes is running articles about income disparity. But to break the stranglehold that Wall Street holds - and to make it even possible to vote for politicians who will address income disparity, economic injustice and corporate control - will require more than voting for politicians with their latest slick sound bites, platitudes and talking points. What is happening now may very well be the beginning of something that can change the political culture and actually make it possible to vote for politicians who will actually address the issues of income disparity, corporate control and the stranglehold of the financial industry.

[patrice]

89. You couldn't possibly be more transparent.

[Pacifist Patriot]

99. And in 3, 2, ....

I'm not predicting much longevity with this one.

[patrice]

106. At first glance it appears that it may be too stupid to succeed = a bot, you think? nt

[DocMac]

107. It takes some effort to get on my ignore list.

I'm thinking you should be the second one on it.

I'm also wondering if you will get to 50 posts.

[Vinnie From Indy]

112. I think you are dead wrong!

So there!

[AZ Progressive]

118. "If you want change, elect more democrats"

You might as well be saying "Shutup and trust the system" and "They'll do what's in the best interest of you even if they've been taking lots of campaign contributions from corporations."

OWS is the first time that Americans have taken a stand against the corrupt system, and there are people who have been corrupted by the system coming over to places like DU and defending the system because they benefit from it, instead of taking a moral stand against something that is unjust and is threatening the future of the United States, in terms of going the direction of the fall of the Roman Empire.

[U4ikLefty]

150. You will do well on DU3

[sibelian]

168. La la la la....

dum dee dum dum


whistle

[Bjorn Against]

176. What good has electing more Democrats done for us?

Seriously look at Bush's last two years in office and you will see that some of the very worst legislation he signed into law was passed by a Democratic Congress. Warantless wiretapping and the Military Commisions act were approved by a Democratic Congress. We have tried electing Democrats, the problem is that Democrats side with Republicans once they are elected and then the party does everything they can to fight off primary challengers. Occupy Wall Street is far more effective at bringing about change than the party of Ben Nelson is.

[vminfla]

78. Turn down free advertising

The smarter play would have been to gather the best OWS signs and swarm the camera to get the message on screen and into the social conscience of SVU watchers. IF anything, they missed an opportunity to get their message out to a broader audience. The show will simply film around it and create their own OWS crowd with their own signage.

[Eric J in MN]

80. Yes, that would have been better. NT

NT

[No Elephants]

87. It would have been useless. God made post production for things like that.

[Eric J in MN]

90. Yeah, I misread. I thought the poster meant news coverage, not the actual TV show. NT

NT

[No Elephants]

86. Smarter? LOL!

[vminfla]

163. It's smarter to get your message across than to provide a camera crew with shrillish screaming

Yes. It would have been much smarter.

[Pacifist Patriot]

100. I suspect the editing room would have been able to circumvent that.

[vminfla]

139. Now the editing room has hours of shrillish yelling to work with

Far better to take the high road than follow your baser instincts down the low road.

[Eric J in MN]

81. Gothamist was there.

http://gothamist.com/2011/12/09/around_60_occupy_wall_s...

"We have rescinded the film permit. Please exit the park behind you. The officer who had attempted to stop the drumming was now speaking into a megaphone. "If you want to stay outside the park that's fine. But if you do not leave, you will be arrested." Chants of "NYPD doesn't respect Law & Order" broke out. "We're all just extras!" one woman shouted. The crowd joined in: "These cops' costumes look so realistic!" "You guys are great at breaking down sets like these, why don't you do it!"

[Quartermass]

88. But you see

They really didn't shut it down. The episode will be filmed elsewhere.

And yes, free speech is just for the educated and informed, and nobody else has the right to free speech. Nobody else may express an opinion.

[Akoto]

92. Did the plot depict OWS in a largely positive way?

I don't know the answer. If so, they turned down free publicity in a format which would've reached many more people than cable news does. I hope that's not the case, because it would've been a foolish decision.

[Eric J in MN]

95. The episode hasn't aired. The protesters haven't seen the script.

Hopefully, the episode will air in a couple of months.

[Eric J in MN]

93. NY Times article

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/imitation-...

[starroute]

101. Aside from anything else, they were distorting OWS's message

I saw people complaining about the fake protest signs on Twitter last night -- that they were all negative. But looking at the photo in the story, it goes even further than that. Nothing about the 99% or "Another world is possible" -- instead, they say things like "greed no" and "war profiteer."

When did you ever see OWS signs like that? They seem to be intended to create an image of class warfare, people who are envious of success, and everything else of which the right accuses OWS.

And someone tweeted last night that there was even a fake sign (I think in the fake library) saying, "Study Ayn Rand." Even leaving out the Ayn Rand part, OWS would never be that directive or endorse a particular ideology.

I haven't seen any recent episodes of Law and Order -- but the reruns my husband was catching a few years back seemed to work on the basic presumption that anyone who was socially deviant in any way was probably also the murderer. Not every episode was like that, but they played the theme pretty hard.

Whether or not the episode gets permanently shut down, OWS was definitely well-advised to make an issue of it.

[slackmaster]

103. Putting unionized media production people out of work and stifling free speech is FUN!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

127. Did you see the post above?

Unionized crews get paid even if the work is disrupted due to weather or any other reason.

[slackmaster]

129. That's fucked up like a football bat

[BlancheSplanchnik]

104. Awesome!!

[totodeinhere]

105. If the episode were written in a way to be sympathetic to the movement, then I don't

see what's wrong with it. Perhaps the show's producers wanted to show their support for OWS by airing an episode that sheds a positive light on them and at the same times shows police abuses. Many writers and producers in Hollywood are liberals. I would have given the episode a chance first before disrupting it.

[defendandprotect]

114. K/R KICK

[Modern_Matthew]

116. Good. I'm glad they are finally stopping corporate media from portraying them negatively...

The "free speech" argument is petty.

[mmonk]

117. Naomi Wolf had some suggestions this morning on how OWS should handle this

instead of shutting it down.

On top of that, she think there should be some communication between OWS and Producer Dick Wolf concerning portrayal of protesters.

[Pacifist Patriot]

140. Hmmm, dialogue. Now THAT is a brilliant idea.

[nobodyspecial]

189. Not according to many here

Silencing them is evil. Silencing others is OK.

[Callisto32]

122. I cannot condone this.

This is violence, and those that understand that reality will not see this as a gold star on the movement's lapel.


Edit: typo fixed

[Eric J in MN]

143. It's not violence.

Writing on the signs is vandalism.

Eating the pop-tarts is theft.

[Callisto32]

154. Setting the cudgel of the state over someoness head like the sword of Damacles isn't violent?

In my defense, the media should not have said "stormed" when they meant, stood around.

[robinlynne]

123. RIGHT ON!

[PatrynXX]

125. yeah but some of the comments are from brain dead people

has one good job ows for your no demand no leader position whatever. tone deaf type 28 % says OWS is right in exercising their free speech. the others are for the cops.

[aikoaiko]

126. Seems like an overreaction to me, but it was the city that pulled the permit, not OWS.

L&O regularly uses current events ("ripped from the headlines") as context for their fictional stories.

Its not like the OWS hasn't had some alleged issues that would be fodder for L&O plot lines.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/sexual-assaults-occupy-wall-st...

[malaise]

132. K & Effing R

Love it!

[fascisthunter]

134. Oh no... they disrupted people's entertainment....

awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

[Eric J in MN]

144. The episode will probably still air.

Maybe even at the same time it would have otherwise.

[fascisthunter]

181. so no harm at all

[unionworks]

156. (continued)

...wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!

[fascisthunter]

182. good

[jwirr]

141. On this I disagree - I used to watch this program regularly and they

did things like this not as exploitation so much as educational for those people who never watch news. Is an article in a news paper exploitation? If you just want to reach activists play on the internet but if you want to reach the couch potato then get mentioned on the programs they watch. I actually watched this program more to see what they were talking about than because of any other reason. I would rejoice whenever they mentioned news I was reading on DU. Education comes in many forms.

[moondust]

142. Awesome is right!

Heroes say NO to corporate exploitation!

[mvd]

146. K&R

The cities and the mainstream media want to believe the movement is forgotten now, but that's FAR from the truth.

[RollWithIt]

149. Get a grip people, it's a TV SHOW!!!!

Not to mention that the crews that film them and the actors that are in them are almost completely made up of union members who greatly sympathize with the OWS movement. Just sheer stupidity.

[unionworks]

155. Law and order

Is evil.

[sibelian]

169. "made up of union members who greatly sympathize with the OWS movement."

Of NO CONSEQUENCE.

None.

A chance for OWS to be turned into TV fodder and thus a forgettable recuperated part of the spectacle has been thwarted, it's of no consequence at all whether the spectacle generators wanted OWS to be the good guys.

[blackspade]

159. Wait, I thought putting up tents in public parks was illegal.

Oh, that's right, only illegal if you are an Occupier.

[24601]

178. Real tents - or just stunt-double tents? TV & Movie shoots

employ lots of people and fewer than 1% make into THE 1%. The crews also obtain the prerequisite permits and pay the required fees. OWS demonstrates little to no regard for those who are just trying to feed their families, reminiscent of the "You're eiher with us or against us" mantra that was soundly criticized when GWB applied it to GWOT. It demonstrates also their disdain for the 1st Amendment when they stand up only for their own rights.

When you want others to support you - it's intuitive that you take the effort to support them.

[blackspade]

185. You obviously know nothing about the OWS movement.

[24601]

186. Wrong

[DonCoquixote]

161. Hooray

Even though I love Law and order, the OWS needed to show that this cannot be co opted, period.

[katty]

162. OWS not for the purpose of entertainment

[sibelian]

170. Bang on.

u rule

[Modern_Matthew]

174. This is not a free speech issue...

Although I would like to see them shut down all media. Voices of individuals must not be silenced... But silence incorporated bullshit at all costs.

[lynne]

190. Wonder if Law & Order will write the demonstration into the episode?

They were probably delayed but certainly not prevented from taping the episode. Far too much goes into prep of each episode for them to just discard it.

Will be interesting to see if they write the demonstration into it, though.