Natasha Lennard agrees: She has no place in mainstream media after supporting OWS protests

Natasha Lennard was arrested as she covering the Occupy Wall Street protests for The New York Times in October. Later she was videotaped praising the movement, after which the Times said it didn’t plan to use her anymore. “I agree with every pundit who argues that I have no place in the mainstream media,” she writes. “If the mainstream media prides itself on reporting the facts, I have found too many problems with what does or does not get to be a fact — or what rises to the level of a fact they believe to be worth reporting — to be part of such a machine. Going forward, I want to take responsibility for my voice and the facts that I choose and relay. I want them to instigate change.” || Related: Ben Doernberg, a student at Wesleyan University in Connecticut, says he collected the first person-accounts of arrests because “the facts on the ground never seem to make it into the mainstream media.” (Storify)

We have made it easy to comment on posts, however we require civility and encourage full names to that end (first initial, last name is OK). Please read our guidelines here before commenting.

  • Anonymous

    Two observations: 1. The Times really had no choice but to discontinue using Lennard. She took sides in a matter of great controversy. However, most reporters are smart enough to avoid publicly taking sides. That doesn’t mean that they are less biased than Lennard. It just means that they value their jobs more. The Times doesn’t mind biased reporters. It just doesn’t like being embarrassed.
    2. Why does the Times need to rely on freelancers to cover a major story in Manhattan? It’s a sad state of affairs when the Times relays on poorly paid freelancers to cover the news in New York. Of course, it saves the Times a lot of money — no health care, retirement, or vacation costs — but it also seems extremely hypocritical given the Times editorial posture (pose?) as guardian of progressive values.