I'm working with 14 filmmakers to collaberate on a film about the RNC in NYC. (if you have video - contact me at RNCfilm@cameraplanet.com).

But in making that film I found myself in Herald Square on August 31st, as the second day of the Republican Convention got underway.

All day long I'd been bumped, pushed, herded, and fawned over by mix of
policemen, publicists, and activists.

I was - THE MEDIA. Or, as protesters call us "Media", as in "Media Over
Here" or "hey MEDIA."

The day had been full of events, staged for maximum effect. Some worked
better than others. The giant lawn sculpture of The Statue of Liberty on the
Sheeps Meadow was hard to get excited about from the ground. But the
HalliBACON protest in front of the Texas Delegation's Halliburtton breakfast
was effective political theatre.

In Herald Square MSNBC's Chris Mathews was doing a panel discussion about
Barbara Bush's role in the campaign. As the chat went on - crowds gathered
on both sides of 6th Avenue. Chanting "This is what Democracy looks like"
and "Down with Bush."

Despite the live camera positions and Crane shot - MSNBC ignored the din
around them. I asked a producer why and she said "We don't want to let
staged events dicate the news." Ok, makes sense - they didn't want to be
'played.' But wait a minute - what's happening inside Madison Square
Guarden? Isn't that a 'staged news event'? What's the difference.

The protesters - who I spoke to at length - had reasoned, passionate,
polticially asstute opions. They had something to say. But after being
ignored by MSNBC - one of them jumped a fence and tried to 'get' Chris
Mathews. Why? What was their goal? To simply act out and cause trouble? Or
was it their acknowlegement that this kind of action was the only way to
'make news' and become part of the story.

Later that night - Nightline did a half hour on New York City security. Lots
of shots of police, guns, phone banks, and promises of safety and security.
At the end of the broadcast they dedicated perhaps 20 seconds to the
'protesters' whith a series of shots of arrests. Again - the news isn't what
they say - it's simply pictures of them in handcuffs being taken away.

What we have to come to terms with is that the rules have changed. A
balanced attempt to cover the convention would have asked - how many protest
organizatons are they, what is the difference between them. How can viewers
understand the scope, issues, and agendas of these groups of individuals.

To suggest that they're simply here to cause 'mischief' or 'tear down the
government' is to tear the heart out of our democracy. Dissent is essential.
And coverage of it can't be sidelined or marginalize.

And for mainstream media the need to return to covering news is all the more
essential.