Slashdot Mirror
UC Davis Spent $175,000 To Bury Search Results After Cops Pepper-Sprayed Protestors (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The University of California, Davis spent at least $175,000 to improve its reputation on the internet after images of campus police pepper-spraying protestors went viral in 2011, according to documents obtained by The Sacramento Bee. The money went to public relations firms that promised to clean up the university's search results. One company outlined a plan for "eradication of references to the pepper spray incident," according to the documents, and was eventually paid nearly $93,000, including expenses, for a six-month campaign in 2013. After that, the Bee reports, the university paid $82,500 to another PR firm to create and follow through on a "search engine results management strategy." The latter firm was later given thousands more in other contracts to build a university social media program, and to vet its communications department.
The Streisand effect strikes again. I find it justice that by news outlets reporting that UC Davis paid to cleanse the web of the incident means that people will be reminded of the incident.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Know what else is great for your reputation? Not acting like a bunch of fucking assholes. And it's free!
... the fact that Davis tried to bury this in the first place, or that they were gullible enough to flush $175K down the toilet for that kind of scam.
I don't know if you saw the picture, but the protesters here were sitting down with linked arms, not in any way threatening the "peace" officer or pushing him to his limit. So while your point may be justified in some contexts, this isn't one of them.
What I find interesting is that this case highlights the university's complicity with the violent act meted out upon peaceful protesters. Fifty years down the line, without these attempts to scrub the world clean of "that photo", it would have been linked to one bad officer whose employer's fault is giving him the job in the first place. But by trying to whitewash the incident, the university is effectively saying "Actually, this was us, employing violent thugs is policy, not an accident, and we abhor peaceful protest. We believe this so strongly we're willing to spend $175k on rehabilitating the reputations of those we employ to harm others."
Which is... revealing.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
"According to a database of state worker salaries, he earned $119,067 in 2011, the last year for which figures are available."
He received $38,000 in workman's compensation for the suffering he experienced after the event, which isn't included in the salary figure.
http://www.sfgate.com/politics...
Lt John Pike of UC Davis received $38k in compensation for the trauma he suffered which was 8k more than the protesters he assaulted.
The appropriate response to a lone wolf security guard from a PR standpoint is to issue a statement that it was the act of a single guard
Hey, Junior, RTFM. It wasn't a "security guard", it was a fucking cop. It wasn't just the school that paid this guy's salary, it was all of us.
Pursuing a cover-up campaign makes it look a lot more sinister, indicating (right or wrong) that the university supports the behavior
They do. That's why their own personal police department (and schools very much do set the tone for their PDs) is hiring people who think that pepper spraying peaceful protesters is a good idea.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The students also had the police officers surrounded, had been asked and ordered to move. Had been shown the pepper spray and told what would happen if they did not move to allow the police officers through. The students were blocking a main thoroughfare of the campus, and preventing the officers from doing their jobs, heck the officers were surrounded they were even being prevented from leaving the scene.
The African Americans in Birmingham, Alabama were surrounded by police and were shown the police dogs and fire hoses if they did not disperse. The protestors were blocking a main street in Birmingham preventing traffic. Heck, the officers were surrounded and prevented from leaving the scene.
In short the students had every chance to avoid it. They deserved what they got. The School needs to grow a pair and back their officers who acted appropriately. They could have pulled out their billy clubs and started beating on the students.
In short, the African Americans had every chance to avoid it. They got what they deserved. The South needs to grow a pair and back their officers who acted appropriately. They did pull out their billy clubs and started beating on protestors.
Lack of context, much?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Clearly, you need to look up the definition of the word "surround." There were a LOT more students and officers. Given that the officers do not have wings, and could probably not pole-vault even if they had the poles, surrounding is certainly possible.
Here is a video showing what happened; not just the pepper spraying, but everything leading up to it. Around 7:30 you can see the officer telling the protestors individually that if they do not move, they will be sprayed and then saying "Do you understand?" Yeah, how horrible of him, giving them every chance to avoid being sprayed.
People certainly have the right to protest, but they have no right to impede those who are not involved in the protest. You can see them blocking the walkway. There was PLENTY of grass there. Stay on the grass, and don't block the people not involved in the protest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Make up context much. The Alabama protestors did not surround the police. In fact they were marching up the road. And pepper is not dogs.
That was the point. The protestors at UC Davis did not "surround" the police. They were sitting down in a line. There were other students watching and filming but the actual protestors were sitting down. So your point was factually a lie. The other point is that assaulting someone who poses no threat to you seems to be okay with you. Have you ever been pepper sprayed? It's a painful experience.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
One of the earliest things we pushed for on international human rights treaties was a ban of collective punishment. Which was exactly the actions that the UC Davis campus police did. One protester got out of line and they used that as an excuse to punish every protester there. Pepper spray is extremely painful and when used in this manner, could be considered as a form of torture, another practice banned by international treaty and most US laws. When the actions of the police came out, the campus head's response was to cover it up and cover her ass to protect her job. It's no surprise that she is under investigation again when she doesn't care about rules or laws, only her own self-interest.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
Wow. You have insulted me. I did not think of that approach to winning an argument. Clearly, you must be right, with your superior knowledge of swear words. I yield to the superior mind.
In that video that YOU linked, did you notice how they are blocking the path that students are supposed to use to get to class? All they had to do is to move so that they are not blocking the students that have paid their money to addend classes! Do you think that this was impossible for them? Do you believe that students do not have a right to attend their classes?
Right around the 9.57 mark, you can SEE the police apparently surrounded. Students in front of them, behind them, and to the left of the screen. I cannot fully see to the right because the frame is cut off, but that pretty much looks like they are surrounded to me. And, wow, the students behind them look like they are standing!
So, who am I to believe? You, or my own eyes in the video that you linked?
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Under your interpretation, the first amendment is meaningless. "You can protest, but anything we do to you is your fault" means that there is no right to protest.
Just declaring that the order to disperse is a "legal order" does not automatically make it so, but plenty of police seem to think that it does.
In this case, the protesters were clearly peaceful, were offering no resistance and presented no threat to the police. Other people were not affected by the protesters since they could have easily walked around the protesters.
Furthermore, the officer who used the pepper spray was not authorized to carry and use this weapon. Double standards such as this (no meaningful action for breaking department rules and policies) serves to encourage the use of excessive violence against the public.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!