Comments on: Behold The Power of Events: Occupy Your World

By: Joan Eisenstodt

Joan Eisenstodt — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 06:15:27 +0000

I think “Occupy” is a whole different model – maybe a more relevant model – than ‘traditional’ demonstrations or certainly than conferences. People are gathered together because it matters to them individually and collectively.

If professional event organizers were involved, @deephealing, I fear some passion would depart and it would be another .. political convention. I’m fascinated by how it is playing out and find, w/o corp. sponsors (like the Koch Bros. for the Tea Party) it is doing remarkably well.

What can WE borrow from the Occupy model?

By: Peter Straube

Peter Straube — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 23:36:53 +0000

Appreciate the thoughts, deephealing. I suppose this is no different than any PR/publicity strategy: you may court the media so that they will shine a light on your story, but you can’t control the way the story gets told. However, you CAN influence it…

By: Peter Straube

Peter Straube — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 23:34:24 +0000

Love the connection of Open Space to Occupy, Joan. In both cases, we need to give up some measure of control of the results in order to let ideas emerge…but that can be scary, because it’s unpredictable. And when people (like planners) are focused on ROI, that is going to feel risky.

By: deephealing

deephealing — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 17:08:11 +0000

About the media: Thanks for your informative post and thread. A point of clarification that seems to be lost on the general public. Network was actually about exploitation and voyeurism. IMDB summarizes the movie thusly, “A TV network cynically exploits a deranged ex-TV anchor’s ravings and revelations about the media for their own profit.” http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/. The media is primarily interested in attracting viewers. Nothing sells like controversy and, “if it bleeds, it leads.” Occupiers rightly doubt the media’s ability to portray the movement accurately, “The Revolution will not be televised.”

That being said, the Occupy Movement could really use the help of professional event organizers like you. Please consider pitching in if you can!

By: Joan Eisenstodt

Joan Eisenstodt — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:00:29 +0000

It occurs to me that the “Occupy” movements are all open-space/unconferences, aren’t they? Designed by those who show up — and in Open Space .. “whoever shows up are the right people”, “when it starts it starts”, “whatever happens is the only thing that could have happened”, and “when it’s over it’s over” .. and of course the law of motion and responsibility (formerly the law of two feet) applies.

So let’s view it this way: let’s say you’re gathering people and they all have different POVs. Will some be disruptive? Of course! Will you want to make some go away? You bet! Will all opinions lead to something? Yep .. something .. tho’ it is not known.

I concur that violence and destruction have no place in any movement. Then again, as the late Andy Rooney felt about war .. it was easy to be a pacifist before he went overseas in WWII and realized that there must sometimes be war. (I, a pacifist, want all things to be settled peacefully. I also know that the toppling of evil sometimes requires more.)

Rambling at this early hour before a flight. Think that we could look at whether open space can bring something to the Occupiers — tho’ they seem to be doing amazing work in consensus building.

By: Peter Straube

Peter Straube — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 01:39:26 +0000

Thanks for your thoughts here, Johanna. I agree that, to be successful, any initiative towards change eventually requires constructive action, not just identifying the problem.

By: Johanna

Johanna — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 22:15:18 +0000

Great post. Certainly an event that could be affective with a defined objective and clear message. But it’s more then that. It’s affectivy communicating to their audience and how they deliver their message that will determine whether they’ll be heard. I’m not their audience, but I’m not sure I fit the 99% either. I’m an opportunist. I seek opportunity, and if I don’t find it, I create it. Occupy Vancouver and the world had my attention until I started to see a beautiful city, my home, being destroyed with more motivation then I’ve seen to make it a better place by the occupants. I can’t speak for the rest of the world, but from my perspective, it’s not going to drive the change they are looking for unless they put forth more effort and thought. If you want to be heard you have to be the change. Your actions will speak for you, and so far, the message isn’t positive. I hear the problem, I’ve yet to hear a solution.

By: Peter Straube

Peter Straube — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:06:21 +0000

Thanks for your thoughts so far, Joanne & Jeffrey. Today I ran into a few ways that MoveOn.org has been using “Occupy” to drive their agenda and gather more folks into the fold–which is targeted at more specific outcomes.

Also note this statement read by Keith Oberman on Monday, which articulates the Occupy position, at least in NYC: http://front.moveon.org/the-occupywallstreet-statement-as-read-by-keith-olbermann/

And this afternoon, a campaign to draw others into protesting the impending eviction of protestors from Zuccotti Park:
http://www.civic.moveon.org/defend_ows/?rc=homepage

By: Joan Eisenstodt

Joan Eisenstodt — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:55:26 +0000

One more thing: food, critical to the success of meetings, is also critical to the sustained efforts of those who protest: http://nyti.ms/pOVVhR

By: Joan Eisenstodt

Joan Eisenstodt — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:52:35 +0000

Jeffrey – I concur and wonder if you think the Arab Spring would have been as effective if it had been only venting and no change were seen? If “Occupy” continues and no changes are made, then what? Will venting be enough? If the Tea Party had not seen support in Congress and in State Houses, would their rallies have meant as much to them? (Ok..asking you to put yourself in the position of a Tea Party member .. maybe a stretch.) – Joan