“CWA Supports the Occupy Movement”

Posted by on Nov 21, 2011 at 7:30 am

Been wondering why the media is so cravenly sympathetic to the violent “Occupy” movement? They’re part of it, that’s why.

While journalists are quick to expose conflicts of interest that could influence political leaders, some often-sympathetic reporters covering the Occupy Wall Street movement might want to look in the mirror.

Those are the journalists belonging to the Newspaper Guild, a national union that represents many journalists in the state, including some at The New York Times.

The Guild is a branch of the CWA, or Communications Workers of America, one of the strongest supporters of the Occupy effort in the nation.

The union’s home page on the Web, for instance, proudly declares, “CWA Supports the Occupy Movement.’’

And it also declares, “CWAers have joined with the Occupy movement across the country to stand up against the destructive power of corporate greed.”

Indeed a look at their home page is filled with links to the OWS movement, as well as one to recall Governor Walker in Wisconsin, so don’t expect any impartial coverage of that story, either.
When you “share” the goals of the deranged occupiers, don’t expect fair and balanced coverage.

“We share the same goal: that it’s time to put our country ahead of personal enrichment. It will take a broad movement of millions of us, standing together, to make sure that our voices are heard,” said CWA President Larry Cohen.

“Removing Occupy demonstrators from Zuccotti Park or from any other city in our country won’t stop the movement that is growing every day, to get money out of politics, to create good jobs in the U.S, and to restore our democracy and the standing of ordinary Americans.”

I think we’ve figured out why nearly every news story on OWS is sure to have the “mostly peaceful” meme within it.

Tags: , , ,

6 Responses to ““CWA Supports the Occupy Movement””

  1. Linda Seebach on 21/21/11 at 9:16 am

    I agree that media coverage (of anything) is likely to be slanted left, but as a retired journalist who worked for papers that had Newspaper Guild contracts (though I was never a memebr) I caution you against assuming that there is a direct causal connection between what union leaders publicly say, and use their members’ dues to support, and what their members believe.

    The policies that the National Education Association adopts, and the political campaigns it donates to, are certainly not universally supported by every teacher, and if a teacher does express similar views in her classroom, it’s not because the NEA told her to.

  2. Duh on 21/21/11 at 9:59 am

    ” don’t expect any impartial coverage of that story, either” – why would anyone expect impartial coverage (of anything)?

  3. mike191 on 21/21/11 at 10:32 am

    Dear Mrs.Seebach, have you read a recent Nea publication lately?Its more “Das Kapital” than educational pedology.Moreover, your generation that has retired has been replaced by teachers who share the babble of President44.Just look at the number of teachers who brought students to Wisconsin and/or occupy encampments.

  4. Mike_NJ on 21/21/11 at 10:38 am

    In the 4 1/2 years I worked at Verizon Wireless the CWA came in three times to unionize us. They gave us their pitch, handed out trinkets, and we voted.

    We voted No.

    Our benefits were better as was the average hourly rate. Plus, there was far more room for growth when NOT union. On top of that we wouldn’t have to pay dues that went to support causes we didn’t believe in.

    Oh yea. The Union rallies were done during the day, on company time, in the cafeteria, with the full support of management. They knew we’d say no.

  5. Jim Hlavac on 21/21/11 at 11:51 am

    When millionaire news readers working for billionaire media companies are “for” a rabble which is “against” millionaires and billionaires there is hypocrisy and something else afoot. It’s so strange to watch. I can’t wait for the Occupiers to get up into the NY Times building and the Times Square media studios — and then we might see the press coverage change.

  6. FrancisChalk on 22/22/11 at 7:07 am

    From Webster’s Dictionary: Journalist: a liar; a deceitful person; one whose every action is in support of Marxism; a worthless piece of shit.