Message lost in #OccupyVancouver
After watching protesters line the streets of New York, Vancouverites decided to take initiative and do the same. However, there were some notable differences between the demonstrations that highlight the financial inequalities facing different classes. I could not help but be disappointed in the Vancouver messaging.
When questioned by the media, Vancouver protestors were unable to deliver a clear message, instead resorting to the Robin Hood rhetoric. To simply say you want “the rich to fall” will not result in change. When you react out of anger, you are blind to the realities of the situation. You begin to act in haste and forget to provide evidence that supports your view, which was the case with the participants of Occupy Vancouver.
The media soon acknowledged these flaws and stopped asking organizers for their opinions. As such, media coverage of the event turned to the communication breakdown and potential for disruption. On October 19th the Province ran the headline Occupy Vancouver plans rowdy protest for President George H. Bush’s Surrey visit. As predicted, rioters made their way to Surrey. The protest for equality quickly became arguments for Bush’s incarceration for war crimes. The message was not clear and caused many to question the meaning of the protest. It appears faith in public debate is being lost.
In many ways, the Occupy Vancouver movement had the same communication problems as the now infamous Vancouver riots. Many protestors appeared to join the movement for the sake of making noise. They did not bring any insight into the collective dialogue about the global financial situation, instead holding up ridiculous signs. The messages of equality and a better standard of living for all were lost. The protest became a joke and a target in the realm of social media. An Internet meme of Cookie Monster arguing for equality on Sesame Street began circulating on the Facebook profiles of Vancouverites. If we do not take ourselves and our opinions seriously, it is highly unlikely the government will listen to our concerns either.
To form one unified public opinion for a group of people is undoubtedly difficult. However, it is necessary in order to be effective. Without it, a protest can become a game of telephone where the message is misconstrued and ultimately lost. 
In the final analysis, Occupy Vancouver protestors lacked a unified message supported by facts. As we all know, key messages are important but they are nothing without evidence.
It is unfortunate that protesters who truly did want change were overshadowed by those who like to make noise. This is the continual dilemma with mass demonstrations. It is important to understand how we present ourselves as a city, especially following the hockey riots.
Did Occupy Vancouver fall flat because the vast majority of Vancouverites are content with our system and do not want to hear the opposition? Or is it because we allow ourselves to be seen as troublemakers?
