So an underworked lobbying firm sees Occupy Wall Street as a marketing opportunity, writes a report exaggerating the potential scope and power of the movement, and pitches it to the American Bankers Association: "Pay us $850,000 to counter this burgeoning threat!" The American Bankers Association doesn't fall for it, but MSNBC and a Washington Post reporter do and report the story as Wall Street being scared by the incoherent and unpopular Occupy movement, which therefore must not be incoherent and unpopular. (The WaPo headine "How Wall Street really views the protesters" is entirely false.)
What media bias? Occupy Wall Street edition
Related Entries:
- What media bias? - Romney's car elevator
- Around the web, February 21
- What media bias? Freddie Mac edition
- NY Times partisan hackery department: filibuster division
- Setback for Chevron in fraudulent Ecuador litigation
- Reuters fact check
- San Francisco sick leave followup
- Wherein George Soros wastes his money
- Trask on Prakash
- Dahlia Lithwick does it again
- What media bias? Prakash on Penn State
- Judge Upholds New Rules Prohibiting the 'Occupation' of Zuccotti Park
- Ohio union vote
- Questions for Susan Saladoff about "Hot Coffee"
![]() |
Rafael Mangual Project Manager, Legal Policy rmangual@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
Communications Manhattan Institute communications@manhattan-institute.org |