Establish how many will show up. Establish a bare minimum "drop dead" commitment, and if that number is not reached, consider cancelling it. If only 10-20 show it, on the reverse, it looks ridiculous and ragtag. They want people to buy their newspaper. Will such a demonstration cause people to think "Hey, what is this? Maybe I will buy an LA Times to see what the hell it is about." I would shoot for 300 people, as bare minimum.
Ask yourself. Will the LA Times be influence or forced to act by a protest outside?
Also, will this pull people off of any campaigns at this critical time when they should be doing GOTV, phone banking, literature drops, etc. in order to knock out Obama?
I think protests are not always an effective thing. Just giving some ideas.
There are more effective ways right now to raise up and become part of a larger grassroots movement after the election no matter who wins.
I've seen a comment that a supporter would be just as happy if McCain/Palin don't win. I've thought that but there is too much at stake so can't go that far. No matter who wins, the next four years may be some of the hardest in our history, and you know the media will be trashing McCain/Palin nonstop if they win.
I hope the liberal, biassed, capitalist, MSM is one of the losers in this election. No bailouts for them!!!
I agree in principle. I still think you’re forgetting this is California. It’s not in play. I do however agree that if numbers can’t be significant enough, it’s more of an embarrassment than a protest.
If they can get 50 to 100 people confirmed, I say do it. Do it with style.
>>I think protests are not always an effective thing. Just giving some ideas.
You have a good point - but if a whole lot of people show up with signs, etc. - the media will have to pay attention. Even if the tape is never released, more people will find out that something negative about Obama is being covered up and they will wonder what could be so bad.
I don’t think the goal has to be the release of the tape - only that more people know that one exists.
If only 10-20 show it, on the reverse, it looks ridiculous and ragtag.I appreciate your concerns.
In my experience with L.A. FRereps, it is difficult to get more than a handful of conservatives to ANY event -- without at least a few days notice.
The GOOD news is, we don't need a LOT of people to have a MASSIVE effect.You should see some of Doctor Raoul's "one man FReeps."
One man with conviction is a majority. :o)Bottom line: Our goal is to create a video image so powerful that the media are COMPELLED to show it -- even if it is against their political interests -- if only to show their "balance."
This is the ironic fact. If you get 1000 people, the press will ignore it. If you get 10, they will cover it and make you look like extremists idiots with a small following that no sane person should join.
The employees of The Times will laugh and make jokes at you from their windows and will get slaps on the back from their liberal buddies and be thought of as heroes.
The problem with this type of action is it is too generalized. Don’t go after The Times, go after the person who made the call to keep it under wraps. Separate the perp from the herd and put on a full court press. Make it seem like not a decision from The Times but a partisan decision from a partisan media hack.
Then do something spectacular.
Think Dan Rather, not CBS. Personalize it.
Taking down Dan Rather hurt CBS as well. Focus, personalize, go for the jugular and don’t let go.