Featured, On Campus - by Charlie Eisenhood on Monday, February 23, 2009 21:09 - 70 Comments - 595 views
Three days have now passed since the end of my long stay inside the barricaded Kimmel dining hall and I’ve finally had a chance to sit down and collect my thoughts about the experience. I have some information to share that I couldn’t publish during the occupation (for various reasons) and ideas about why the response from the NYU and outside community has been resoundingly negative. I’ve had the chance to speak with lots of students, faculty, and administrators today and over the weekend – opinions have been fairly consistent.
Most thought the demands were too scatter shot, even if they agreed with some or all of them Mystery alaska download. Most thought TBNYU’s hypocrisy was very damaging, especially surrounding the revised statement of non-violence and abstention from property damage. Opinions about the proper consequences have been more mixed – something I will touch on after the jump.
(For a really smart list of how TBNYU screwed up, go here)
First, let’s take a look at some key lines of the original non-violence/no property damage statement.
We do not intend any harm or damage to any living beings or to private property, and strongly criticize any will to do so. Any individual who wills such violence or destructiveness will be asked to leave the premises, and will not represent the interests of this occupation.
…
In our quest to construct an ideal university, we seek a university founded upon mutual respect, democracy and accountability, and we espouse methods consistent with that quest.
OK, let’s start here. As you know, the administration refused to allow access to the balcony of Kimmel. (This was, incidentally, the last bit of meeting that I heard before I was banned). So, TBNYU decided to access it themselves. How did they do this? With the tools they brought to defeat a deadbolt. Although they attempted to keep it hidden from me, it was quite obvious that they were trying to break the lock to get outside. But I was warned repeatedly that if I reported anything about what was “going on over there,” that I would be expelled from the room. (How they planned to do that without violating their non-violence pledge is unclear).
After they broke through, I went over to take pictures of the tools, broken lock, and the hole in the door where the lock once was. Somebody didn’t like that, and even though I told them I wouldn’t publish the photos until later, they had me delete them off of my camera entirely. I guess they didn’t want it to be known that they were planning on going outside all along.
As they broke out, they dropped the abstention from property damage language from their non-violence statement with this disclaimer:
Though we realize that this choice to revise our original policy may undermine ideological consistency of this action, we feel that reacting to the changing situation of the occupation is more important than adhering to any dogma, even our own.
Lovely rationalization! I guess that “strong criticism” towards property damage wasn’t ever very strong.
Then, of course, there were the two instances of new students busting in past guards to join the occupation. You can watch videos of this here and here. Once again, I saw intentional organization to get these new students in. Not only were top organizers on their cell phones calling friends to join them, but at one point, I was moved from my blogging post near one of the grates blocking access to the kitchen so they could try to open it and help students enter. They didn’t tell me that, of course. But I said, “Oh, you’re gonna try to get some more people in through here?” And one protester told me, “If you put that on your blog, we’ll fucking throw you out of here.”
Wow, thanks. Really nice of you.
I should mention that, despite the constant threats and many occupiers that openly hated me, there were some very nice people inside. Some shared their food with me and were conversational and pleasant. One woman had the maturity to say, “I just want to tell you that I really appreciate what you’re doing. Even though I don’t agree with everything you’re writing, you’re doing a really good job.” These nice people tended to be outweighed by open disdain from the leaders of the group.
Oh, and the leaders. There were definitely leaders. TBNYU can say what they want about a “non-hierarchical” organization, but there were clear planners and organizers. This is one of the big reasons their occupation failed both in terms of public support and university response to their demands.
When the occupying group gathered to discuss some upcoming decision, one person was always a “facilitator.” This person set the agenda and then selected people to speak and give their ideas about the decision. They would arbitrarily decide when that process was over and then hold a vote. Those in favor of the plan gave a thumbs up, those unsure a thumbs sideways, and those opposed a thumbs down. Unanimous thumbs up was required to approve a plan.
Here’s where it got tricky: the facilitator was almost always one of the leaders. They were then able to set the agenda and steer the conversation towards their ideal plan. It just so happened that the leaders of the occupation were also the more radical and driven members of the group. The required unanimous vote, performed openly, increased pressure on the members to fall into line with the leaders and give approval. Peer pressure, I think, radicalized the group.
Other times, the negotiators (also comprised of top organizers) made decisions without the approval of the group. At one point, some student Senators met with the TBNYU negotiating team. When the negotiators returned, I asked them how the meeting went. I was told, “Predictable.” I overheard one of the negotiators later telling the group, “We have nothing to report from the meeting with the Senators.”
Over the weekend, I spoke to one of the Senators involved in the meeting. He told me that the administration (meaning Linda Mills, the senior Vice Provost, and Lynne Brown, senior Vice President of University Relations) was not willing to meet directly with the protesters as long as they occupied Kimmel, but that they would meet with Senators who could act as a go-between. I guess this was “predictable” and “nothing” to the TBNYU negotiating team – but who knows why they wouldn’t give that a shot?
But now let’s get real. Pun intended.
Despite the affectation of seriousness, the whole occupation ultimately felt like a joke. From wild exaggerations about crowd size to topless girls to chants like “This is what democracy looks like!” (except, no, not at all) to veganism to keffiyehs, it was a weird, funny, occasionally exciting event, but not a serious protest. The most exhilarated I saw the protesters was when there was a crowd outside at 1 AM on Friday morning: they craved support, intrigue, chanting, and slogans; the demands felt like an after thought. They wanted glory, to “be remembered.” And in that quest they didn’t even stop to think about violating their own guiding principles in order to chant and cheer from the balcony. Didn’t it just feel like a silly stunt?
Also, if you watch the final moments video taken by Alex Lotorto, who I interviewed here, you’ll see more crazy stuff, including a guy screaming “fucking snakes!” at the administrators and an inventory of personal items that Lotorto fears might be confiscated. It’s like a caricature of a protest.
In terms of appropriate response and punishment, I guess I’m not very sympathetic. It was made clear that 1 AM Friday morning was the cutoff time and that any students remaining after that time were liable to be expelled and arrested. Many protesters left at around 12:45, fearing punishment. After 1 and the scuffle on the streets (which was comprised of minor incidents and not a riot – I hyperbolized that night. The police did use pepper spray, however, and some belligerent protesters were beaten), the administration offered the safe harbor agreement again. The students, if they chose to leave peacefully, would have been basically granted amnesty, with punishment only arising if there was future misconduct. Their negotiators would have also been able to sit down with administrators to discuss the demands.
In another secret meeting, though, the remaining 18 protesters agreed to forego the safe harbor offer and instead to remain until morning. It was made clear that they would face consequences and that they would not receive this offer again.
Now they are facing consequences. Considering the property damage, the guard sent to the hospital after an influx of new occupiers, the police presence and pepper spraying, and the negative media coverage, I don’t think anyone should be surprised that they are being suspended. And here lies the biggest fail: TBNYU managed to make NYU’s administration and students the victims.
When I left in the wee Friday morning hours, I asked the guards to contact Bob Butler. After a short wait, another administrator met me and escorted me out of Kimmel through a side entrance. I am not being punished.
*
Let’s go back to the final sentence of TBNYU’s non-violence statement: “In our quest to construct an ideal university, we seek a university founded upon mutual respect, democracy and accountability, and we espouse methods consistent with that quest.”
You wanted mutual respect (equal treatment), democracy (judicial hearings), and accountability (responsibility for your actions). You’re getting it.
*
Questions for me? Drop them in the comments. I’ll do my best to respond to as many as I can. But this will be my final official post on the occupation. I return to the national beat tomorrow. Thanks again for your support.
I’d like to note that in my video of TBNYUers panicking, it may have seemed (as it did to me then) that some of the protesters were fleeing out of the occupied area. It seems that they were just jumpy about police; most ultimately remained in the building and were suspended on Friday.
70 Comments
Pat McClellan
Charlie, you’re my hero. Congratulations again on the excellent live blogging and on this great retrospective piece.
Mona Li
Thank you for the great reporting and up-to-date info. Keep up the good work. You deserve all the credit you’re getting.
Jon Levine
You should get a Pulitzer
Tamara Whitehouse
Are you in journalism? Consider it if you’re not. Because you do have a natural talent for this kind of thing, and balls.
Eric Levin
Charlie, this is phenomenal. Major, major props to you NYULocal for the great coverage. The only problem is that I have nothing nearly as entertaining anymore! 
Jonah Birch
Wow, Charlie, this article is problematic to say the least. You seem deeply disturbed that some of the people inside didn’t trust you. From this piece it seems that those people were entirely justified.
We need to have a little perspective about what amounted to a non-violent sit-in: someone inside the Kimmel Center used a screwdriver to take out a boltlock after the administration refused them access to a balcony, clearly in an effort to isolate the protestors from outside supporters. Not exactly breaking windows, overturning trashcans and starting fires.
The massed NYPD outside, on the other hand (which the administration had called onto the scene) used battons and pepper-spray against the protestors. Interestingly, you seem a lot more concerned about the actions of the former group than the latter.
The wave of protestors that entered the building Thursday night ran past security guards. The security guards engaged in physical violence against the protestors, not the other way around. The administration then resorted to the silliest tactics to force the remaining protestors out of the building – lying to the students’ negotiators in order to isolate them in another room, and then trying to steal their cellphones – tactics that would make a 12 year old blush. All this in an effort to avoid any discussion with the students.
The administration’s behavior will be familiar to any of the graduate students who were around for the strike a few years back.
If the protestors were excited about outside support, perhaps it’s because they knew such support was the only real guarantee of their safety. If someone called the administrators “fucking snakes,” it’s because that’s exactly how the administrators apparently acted. What is that evidence of exactly? A lack of seriousness? Or some really tired students pissed because the administration had once again lied rather than even talk to people who disagree with the university’s direction.
And by the way, attitudes towards the protestors on campus are much more mixed than you suggest. Some departments and grad student organizations, for example, have already put out statements demanding that the administration drop charges against the students, and more will be coming this week. Over 150 faculty have already signed a statement with the same demand.
Bob Jones
True american hero.
Bill McNeil
Thanks for the update. Were you ever concerned that you would be punished for staying past the 1am cut off?
Sarah M
Great coverage Charlie! A Question- What are your thoughts on the non-NYU students who were a part of the occupation (from the inside)?
Noam Chomsky
Well shit
Sam Fishman
Top-notch, Charlie. I’m going to NYU next year and I followed your reporting through this whole fiasco. You are truly a master of journalism, my hat goes off.
Jordan Budd
God bless you.
Henry Chan
First thing you ate after you left?
And great job writing/reporting this.
Why were you not at the party this weekend???????? is my question.
Alison Green
to Jonah Birch:
The administration was not blocking the balcony to keep the crowd from supporters. I think you’ll notice a trend across university buildings: all balconies are locked and off limits (and have been since the 2003-2004 rash of suicides) and I completely understand why they wouldn’t want an unsupervised group of fools with access to a balcony. Someone could have been knocked over or fallen and the university would be liable.
Tom DeGroot
Awesome job Charlie. Can’t stress enough how fantastic your reporting was.
Andy Mok
@ Jonah Birch
“From this piece it seems that those people were entirely justified.”
What? You mean that Charlie reporting the truth would make them look like a bunch of lunatics? Well then yeah I guess they were “entirely justified.”
“The massed NYPD outside, on the other hand (which the administration had called onto the scene) used battons and pepper-spray against the protestors.”
That’s what happens when you mess with cops. Were the cops supposed to let them break down the barricades and get run over? If you’re gonna lay your hands on a police officer, do expect some type of consequence.
“The security guards engaged in physical violence against the protestors, not the other way around.”
Watch the video posted by Charlie and you will see that the protesters intentionally rushed toward the security guards whose jobs were to guard the entrance. Oh and guess who ended up being taken away in an ambulance.
Jack Manley
I appreciate the fact that you were willing to continue the report to give us a full picture of what actually went on. I know you couldn’t resist the chance to editorialize slightly, but in this case, I feel the remarks were entirely justified, because you lived through an experience with these people in the interest of uncovering the truth, and I greatly respect that.
In addition, please pass on my thanks to the NYU Local writers for turning my comment into an article. It means a lot to me that I articulated something that you all judged as relevant and worth providing to your site’s readers. Great reports about the occupation, it’s been a pleasure reading them the last few days!
Dana Schmidt
I specifically walked the 30 minutes to campus before 1AM on that frigid Friday to chant “FREE CHARLIE!” (in the off chance that the police arrested you with the rest of the misguided protesters).
Congratulations on a job fantastically done.
Nelly Yuki
Amazing, amazing work, Charlie. But one question still boggles my mind: did you use the kitty litter bucket?
Daniel Desario
What is so offensive about young people having fun? If it’s in the name of positive change, even better. Why is everyone so quick to judge them? They were doing something bolder than the kids hopping to and fro fashion week parties last week.
Jonah Birch
To Alison Green: your rationalization of the administration’s actions is demonstrably wrong. Go look at the balcony. You’ll see tables and chairs there for eating, and find that it is open during the day. In any case, if the administration was really concerned about student safety (and subsequent lawsuits) they wouldn’t have ordered NYU security to tackle grad students running past or sent the NYPD out to smack demonstrators around with battons, two actions vastly more likely to lead to injuries.
To Andy Mok. You write: ” you’re gonna lay your hands on a police officer, do expect some type of consequence.”
Obviously no one touched a cop. Anyone who’s had experience with the NYPD knows that if you touched one (like, at all), you’d get slapped with about 15 criminal charges, including assault and battery on a police officer, in a second. One person got arrested outside the protest. Dozens were assaulted with battons and/or pepper-spray. And no, I don’t think that the demonstratos deserved to get attacked because they pushed over the barricades penning them in on the sidewalk.
But you’re right that this sort of brutality is to be expected when you bring dozens and dozens of police into the situation. That’s why the administration’s decision to do so, rather than speaking with the protestors, was so absurd.
Andy wrote: “Watch the video posted by Charlie and you will see that the protesters intentionally rushed toward the security guards whose jobs were to guard the entrance. Oh and guess who ended up being taken away in an ambulance.”
I watched the video. Students were trying to avoid the security guards. Security guards were punching, pushing, and tackling students. Clearly they were ordered to avoid allowing new entrants into the cafeteria at all costs – presumably because the administration’s strategy was to wait for the students numbers and energy to decline before picking off the remnants of the occuation. It’s terrible if that security guard really was hurt – though I’m sure that the administration wasn’t discouraging him/her from taking all precautions by leaving on a stretcher in front of the televsion cameras. But that’s exactly my point: the administration was willing to sacrifice NYU employees for the sake of its tactical maneuvering vis-a-vis the protestors. Why would they order security to tackle people entering the cafeteria rather than engaging in a discussion with the protestors?
In any case, your characterization of the protestors as “a bunch of lunatics” suggests that you were going to disagree with what they did no matter what sort of tactics they (or the administration) employed. That’s fine, but I think there are others who are sitting on the fence and who might be pushed in John Sexton’s direction by Charlie’s biased reporting. I find that unfortunate.
Again, it was a freaking sit-in. There have been literally dozens of analogous actions on campuses across the English speaking world in the past three months. They’re regular occurences in large parts of Europe and Latin America. This one escalated because the NYU administration escalated it. The NYU administration escalated it because they aren’t the least bit interested in even discussing students concerns. Which is precisely why tbnyu felt they needed to have a sit-in.
Pat McClellan
Jonah, were you there? Because on the outside there were a ton of anarchists- not NYU students, mind- who were actively taunting the police and rushed at them. They have absolutely no right no complain that the NYPD beat them back, and again, I was standing outside during this incident and I can assure you that claims of police brutality or any more than a small handful of people being pepper sprayed or hit are gross exaggerations. And what exactly were the security guards supposed to do? Their job is to keep people from getting into areas where they aren’t allowed. No students were allowed to enter the 3rd floor of Kimmel, let alone the barricaded cafeteria, at the time those kids rushed in. The guards were doing their job and I didn’t see a single one of them throw a punch or do anything more than try to restrain people.
Pulitzer.
Karl Miller
Jonah,
Next time you gripe about how you are treated, why don’t you consider how you treat other people?
“The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
Karl Miller
Oh, and many Kudos to Charlie. You have renewed my hope that great journalism isn’t dead after all.
Charlie, you’re my hero.
Julianna M.
Amazing. Thank you for not posting stuff like this:
Drew Phillips has been in close contact with his mother over the past few days.
“She’s a mother, she will worry, she’s just worried that [the administration is] going to come down harder than they actually should,” he said.
She also insists her son did not break the lock leading to the balcony of the MarketPlace.
“Drew is a vegan. He does not destroy anything, especially people,” she said, adding, “I think the individuals in charge of destroying the property should be charged.”
-WSN, 2/23/2009, “Confused, Supportive, Worried, Proud”
Peter Kobe
AH!
To be young and stupid….Glorious!
Alex Golden
And one protester told me, “If you put that on your blog, we’ll fucking throw you out of here.”
That statement seems a little ironic from a group who is demanding accountability.
Aurelle Amram
Excellent work.
Henry Chan
“I watched the video. Students were trying to avoid the security guards. Security guards were punching, pushing, and tackling students.”
Did you watch the same video I did? Sure, they were trying to avoid the guards in the beginning, going through the other entrance. When that failed (and after yells of “Over here!” and hitting the window), the students rushed the entrance that clearly had guards in front of it. That’s hardly “trying to avoid the security guards.”
And “punching, pushing, and tackling”? Judging by the video, the guards were doing the best they can not to hurt the students. So much so that they looked awkward trying to stop the rush of people. Had they resorted to “punching, pushing, and tackling,” fewer students would have made it inside.
Bob Sanders
Everyone involved in this is and will continue to be an idiot. The raw footage speaks for itself. Get over yourselves. You’re a bunch of spoiled white suburban kids who are trying to emulate their professors because they heard how cool everyone was in the sixties. You’re not cool you’re brainwashed. Cut off your dreadlocks, take a bath and get a job. You’re make those of us who went to NYU in the past look bad.
Bob Sanders
By the way I was talking about the people in the video not the author of this piece which is really well done.
Farah Khimji
As one of the people inside who interacted with you a good amount, Charlie, I have to say that I am disappointed in the way you’ve handled your reporting. You’ve done a large amount of editorializing, both here and in other articles you’ve written. You were the only press person allowed to be inside for the *entire time* – and honestly, you really did push the boundaries we set up (that’s why people wanted to kick you out). Despite the fact that you continuously showed disrespect for our requests, I and many others still argued to allow you to stay – because we wanted you to be able to report on events from the inside. I’m kind of pissed right now after reading this article, but mostly I’m just really disappointed in you. I don’t think that means anything to you at all, but I wanted to let you know that. And by the way, calling us “panicky” is a pretty low blow – I saw you freaking out
Also, just a factual clarification (hey wait, isn’t it *your* job to research these?) – the “gross exaggerations” that you link to, where we say on our website that there were thousands of protesters outside, is actually a number we got from a New York Times report (we had estimated it at 700, but took their number since they were actually on the ground). Since this is your job to check out, I’ll let you find the article.
Pat McClellan
Farah, you do realize that a large portion of that crowd was shouting derogatory comments at TBNYU rather than rallying in support, right? And, I feel like I’m saying this for the thousandth time, but it is brutally ironic that a group that claims they’re all about transparency even debated the subject of whether or not they should kick out a journalist. How exactly were you planning to throw Charlie out without breaking your “non-violence” pledge?
Farah Khimji
** i left a sentence unfinished at the end of my first paragraph. to finish:
And by the way, calling us “panicky” is a pretty low blow – I saw you completely freaking out at the very end. As soon as you heard that they were threatening to expel us, you jumped up out of your seat, flipped out, started grabbing your stuff and pulling at your hair…And then you bolted. So, who’s really panicky? The 18+ people who stayed behind, knowing that they would have severe consequences, or the guy who freaks out at the first mention of expulsion and runs away?
Henry Chan
@Farah: I assume not pushing the boundaries would entail not reporting on things that portrays TBNYU in a bad light?
Farah Khimji
@Pat:
What evidence do you have of that fact? People keep claiming this, but it logically doesn’t make any sense – why would our detractors take over the entire street, fight back against the cops, and sing “We’re not gonna take it” along with the Rude Mechanical Orchestra?
We were going to ask him to leave, and expect him to honor that request. Given the fact that we were discussing matters of a highly sensitive nature, and he was not displaying very much journalistic integrity or respect for the conditions he originally agreed to, he was lucky that there were people arguing to allow him to stay.
Henry Chan
And Farah, Charlie was never there for you or your group. He wasn’t gonna be expelled because of actions that he didn’t support nor took a part in. Perhaps that’s why he got all “panicky.”
And I’d call it good sense. The good sense not to be expelled for something you didn’t do. The 18+ people who stayed behind…Well, it’s debatable if their decision was brave or just foolishness.
Farah Khimji
@ Henry
Given the fact that NYU Local usually trashes us in its articles, it would be incredibly naive of us to think that Charlie would do otherwise; our issue was him taking pictures and publishing accounts of conversations that could be used as evidence to incriminate us later. That’s what we had issues with. I’d advise you not to assume, but it’s not like you would listen to me anyway.
Pat McClellan
Farah, there was a crowd inside the barricades of mostly anarchists. They had their faces covered and were waving black flags. They were there just to start a fight. The crowd at the back of the barricades and then surrounding the initial group and extending back into the park were mostly counter-protesters, yelling things like “Get out,” “Jump,” and, “What do we want? Quesadillas. When do we want them? Now!” My larger point being that yes, there was a large crowd gathered outside Kimmel, but at least half of that crowd was either counter-protesters or people there just to see what would happen rather than TBNYU supporters.
Henry Chan
“evidence to incriminate us later”?
Christ, what were you guys up to?
Charlie Eisenhood
Wow there’s lots to respond to here.
@ Jonah: You’re rationalizing TBNYU’s decision to go back on their “abstention from property damage” pledge. To say, ‘it’s only a little bit of property damage and that’s ok,’ is just silly.
I couldn’t see what happened on the street from my vantage point, but people I talked to who were there Thursday night said a number of people rushed the barricade. The cops then used pepper spray.
As has already been noted, the security guards were attempting to do their job. If this was a peaceful sit-in, it should have been comprised only of those who were there at the start.
The negotiators were told that administrators would meet with them when they were no longer illegally occupying Kimmel. Since they refused to leave on Friday morning, they were detained and told they were being suspended. Regarding the cell phones, I hadn’t heard that – it does seem reasonable since they had been inciting bum rushes previously by calling people.
I stated explicitly that opinion about the proper punishment was mixed. You don’t point to any petitions of belief in the cause, only about disciplinary action. That is consistent with what I wrote.
Charlie Eisenhood
@ Bill McNeill: Yes, I knew that was a possibility. I spoke to Bob Butler earlier on Thursday night and he assured me that he knew I wasn’t an active protester, but that he couldn’t keep police from arresting me if I didn’t have an NYPD issued press pass (I didn’t). Since it never came to that, I had no issues.
@ Sarah M: I think they, like the TBNYUers, were looking for something exciting and glorious to happen. Alex Lotorto is a film student planning to make a documentary about the experience. That’s what this felt like: a contrived event to make a film about, not a legitimate protest of policy.
@ Henry Chan: Chips and Salsa. And then some prosciutto. SO GOOD.
@ Nicole He: I was in Virginia! I wanted to be there..
@ Nelly Yuki: Ha ha no I was always able to use the bathroom.
@ Daniel Desario: If that is a serious question, it isn’t just a “bit of fun.” It was seriously costly to the university and its students, both in terms of economic cost and general legitimacy of the school. I don’t think this even requires further response.
@ Jonah: I think the TBNYUers escalated it. They actively tried to get people to break past the guards. The administration only brought in police to keep street protesters from breaking into Kimmel; they were not used to detain students inside the occupation.
Charlie Eisenhood
@ Farah: This is actually the only piece I’ve written that wasn’t a part of the liveblog. Not once did I post anything I was explicitly asked not to. I understand that you are upset about my thoughts on the subject, but I am not attempting to be impartial. And let’s be honest, the reason you let me stay was because of the enormous amount of press coverage I generated for your occupation, not because of the kindness of your hearts.
I don’t think at all that calling some of the members there “panicky” is a low blow. Watch the video I took. People were panicking – they wouldn’t even answer my questions as they disappeared down the hall.
And your characterization of my behavior is clearly an attempt to discredit me. I was twittering and blogging throughout the time you claim I was “freaking out” and I gathered my stuff in anticipation of cops raiding the room and needing to be mobile with my camera and computer. The much later “pulling of my hair” came as I was searching for my computer’s power cord, which I never found. (Did you all or any administrators find an extra? I’d love not to have to buy a new one.) Of course, the people reading this will have to decide whether to believe you or me, but I trust they’ll make the right decision.
And your last statement worrying about incrimination goes right to my point about TBNYU’s surprising level of hypocrisy. You all knew you were taking actions that were wrong or illegal and that’s why you didn’t want me to report about them. As Henry pointed out, just because the reporting I was doing was unfavorable doesn’t mean it was bad reporting.
Charlie Eisenhood
@ Farah: Oh and since you were unable to cite your source for the crowd of “as many as a thousand,” I looked for it. I couldn’t find it. Maybe this was misread?
“It was not quite a campus uprising. For most of the thousands of students at New York University, Thursday was a normal day of studying and lectures.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/nyregion/20nyu.html?fta=y
I strongly doubt the crowd even reached 500. I’ll be happy to correct my piece if someone has evidence to the contrary.
The Kimmel Occupation might be a minor blip in the long run for NYU, but it sure captured everybody’s imagination.
More openness and transparency, with more student input and oversight on university affairs is just more democracy. I don’t think TBNYU should be judged harshly for that or students punished.
Gaza has lately sparked more serious student demonstrations and occupations, especially in England, including clashes with the police. You can read about them on the online newsmagazines, NewsHammer and NewsHammerOnCampus.
But NYU’s Occupation, especially due to Charlie’s liveblogging, has been turned into something more personal and fascinating. The more I read and watched the videos, the more I wanted to know. I wound up reconstructing the drama from NYU Local’s coverage into a magazine overview feature, you’ll also find onNewsHammer.
Thanks to everyone at NYU Local for a great student news site and your work on this story Charlie.
In the final analysis I saw the drama being played out as only a stone’s throw away from Dog Day Afternoon. What next, Take Back NYU, the movie?
–Alan Gillis
Steve Voinich
Charlie’s reporting was great and I find it really funny that you honestly believe the crowd out there was to support you. Again, there were never and really big rallying cries, only lookyloos and rubbernecks wanting to see what the cops would do/if you would do anything stupider. You guys didn’t make ‘revolution’, you made a circus.
Farah, if anything, your people are responsible for at least the following:
1) The injured Blanca Castillo. TBNYU encouraged people to rush the guards, apparently unconcerned with their friends’ safety or that of the security guards
2) The wages/salaries of the morning crew of Kimmel cafeteria, who have yet to have been paid. Your actions prevented them from getting paid – hardworking, working class people with families and children. I hope you’re proud of yourselves. A Kimmel worker whom I always get lunch from said, ‘Be sure to thank those kids from letting me pay for my daughter’s school.’ That’s a verbatim quote.
3) The broken door on the balcony. It may be minor but guess what, the door isn’t yours.
I hope your self-indulgent sleepover was worth it.
Myah Williams
i just want to say to Farah and other TBNYU’ers involved that i am appalled that they would consider what they did “civil disobedience”. this undermines and belittles the endeavors of people who over fifty years ago genuinely “peacefully” resisted a malicious and evil political force in the southern places like Birmingham and Selma Alabama for their rights to vote and equality. i think you should do some study on civil disobedience before you try to attempt it again… i suggest you check out the 3 installment of “eyes on the prize”, it’s a documentary about the american civil rights movement focusing on the the Selma Alabama march in 1964 when 600 people stood on a bridge praying while hundreds of cops bludgeoned them and tear gassed them to oblivion. that is police brutality…
secondly, i am “pissed off” that TBNYU took its actions and demands to stand for the NYU student body… i no close to no one at our school who finds what you did more than foolish and detrimental to positive progress… i truly think that in years to come you will look back on this experience from a new light that allows you to criticize yourselves and not the people who respectfully had to handle the outrageous situation you created…
finally, charlie i commend you for your gallant efforts… thank you!
Jon Levine
Some fun facts about the Islamic University in Gaza
Founded by: Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder of HAMAS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Yassin
“Reconciliation with the Jews is a crime.”[9] Yassin’s inflammatory rhetoric was often scrutinized in the news media.[10] On one occasion, he opined that Israel “must disappear from the map”.[10] Yassin’s declaration that “We chose this road, and will end with martyrdom or victory” later became an oft repeated mantra among Palestinians.[11]
In his statement Yassin has declared that Hamas did target Israeli civilians, only in direct retaliation for the death of Palestinian civilians. In his thinking this was a necessary tactic to “show the Israelis they could not get away without a price for killing our people“
To quote something I found on a blog:
“Hamas, an avowedly sexist, anti-Semitic, and anti-homosexual organization, that the university is a hotbed of extremist Islamist thought complete with many Hamas members in teaching positions, and that the school offers both undergraduate and graduate degrees in Sharia law – a completely unethical, sexist, and homophobic system of so-called “justice.”
http://www.iugaza.edu.ps/en/Faculty/Sharia/
The ISUG also requires that all women wear hijab on the campus regardless of religion, and that any and all classes must be gender segregated.
Yeah.
Carl Rodgers
NYU has a real problem with ego.
TJ Small
Farah and the protester who called NYU security “fucking snakes” are two people in this group who strike me as mentally unbalanced. Farah is a pathological liar. She lied about the “police brutality” she experienced. In the video, one can see that the reason she was restrained ws to prevent the crazy chick from running out onto the balcony, where she would no doubt have done something really stupid and theatrical, like try to jump or fake jumping.
Where did thes low lifes come from? “Fucking snakes?” Honestly.
Adam Maresca
Fair assessment of the situation and of the personalities (egos) involved, and, of course, the stunted rationale and coherence behind it all. Great piece, glad you made it out of the mess unscathed and out of trouble.
Still, it’s a shame seeing the notion of actual progressive idealism in young men and women caricatured into such a ridiculous farce by a few snotty kids masquerading as activists… at least there’s level-headed people like you to pick up their slack in maturity and clarity.
Hat’s off to you, Charlie.
Sophia Tarabicos
@ Jon Levine
Thank you for the fun facts! You’ve always been good about research.
@Farah
Listen, I’m sorry your publicity stunt failed horribly and most of your peers are calling for your expulsion, but please, don’t delude yourself into thining that you have any legitimate kind of support among the NYU community. You have made yourselves look like arrogant fools and nearly made a mockery of the university I attend. You and the other leaders of TBNYU should all take a hard look at yourselves and figure out how to make it up to the rest of us who simply can’t stand you any longer.
@ Charlie
Bravo. You are the current rockstar on campus! Ha ha. Now, we have proof that good journalism and the era of blogging can give someone serious credibility. You will have the respect of many of your peers for a very long time. Excellent piece, excellent coverage.
Farah Khimji
@ Charlie
Regarding your charger – from what I remember, you had a macbook, right? We had some miscellaneous electronics that were gathered up at the end – I’ll see if there’s an unclaimed macbook charger.
Regarding everything else – take from this what you will, Charlie. If you can honestly justify to yourself what you did, then ok. I am still incredibly disappointed – not because you didn’t cover us favorably (like I said earlier, since when has NYU Local ever done that?), but because I was expecting a higher level of journalistic integrity than you displayed. As to what the people reading this blog think, it’s obvious that NYU Local has a very specific readership, most of whom have already made up their minds about TBNYU (and that’s fine, all publications have different kinds of audiences). I’m sure the vast majority of them are entirely on your side, so I wouldn’t worry too much about any attempts to discredit you here (although, in the wider world, I’m not so sure).
Best of luck in the future.
William Abercrombie
It’s ironic that a candid liar would worry about Charlie’s journalistic integrity. Where was Farah’s integrity as she stood in front of the City Councilman and lied about the “brutality” she had experienced? The NYU security guards who confronted her did so for her own safety. She should consider attending a psychiatric institution rather than to a higher ed institution. I heard Al Quaeda is looking for a few good women…
Alan Denton
Charlie –
How much sleep did you end up getting? I can’t imagine Kimmel was very warm or comfortable. Were you ever worried about theft if/when you did sleep?
Kate Kornblum
@Charlie: Phenomenal coverage and bravery and willingness to stick it out for the story. I’d be surprised if you don’t get a nice job offer out of this. You sure demonstrated that you deserve it.
@TBNYU: You have actually done more to hurt the cause of transparency at NYU than any action yet taken.
Jon Colombraro
@ Farah: Your inability (or unwillingness) to counter any of the very reasonable arguments against you and your group’s actions only further lower other readers’ already low opinions of them. And when all you can muster up is that, “NYU Local hates us and so does its readers,” that also just shows your ignorance and pig-headed stubborn thinking.
I’m a complete outsider to this story, simply curious by some of the videos I saw. I’ve spent the past several hours reading reports all over the web about this incident, from TBNYU’s own page to the NY Times to Gothamist to WSN, and I found Charlie’s reporting to be the most accurate, as HE WAS THERE THROUGH IT ALL.
And based on the videos I’ve seen (UNEDITED FROM THE OCCUPATION, MIND YOU), I have no trouble whatsoever believing his accounting of your members’ actions, and your hypocrisy.
While SOME of your claims may be valid, while CERTAIN demands you’ve made should be addressed by NYU administration, the methods you used and the actions you undertook only show you “organization” for what it is – a pathetic joke.
I do hope you get expelled, because it ABSOLUTELY seems to be the majority feeling among NYU students who have posted on various mediums about this incident. For the most part, the student body seems ashamed to have you as a public figure.
Charlie, your reporting was EXCELLENT, and I wish you a long, bright future in journalism.
Jerome morales
Farah – I’m glad you’re reading/responding. i am curious as to why TBNYU wanted to make Bobst open to the public in their list of demands.
Thanks
Charlie Eisenhood
@ Farah: Baseless claims about alleged lapses of my “journalistic integrity” are a tacky way of responding to reasonable criticisms of TBNYU’s occupation.
Yes, I have a Macbook. Thanks for your help. And good luck to you and the other TBNYUers during hearings this week.
@ Alan Denton: I slept for at most 20 minutes early Thursday morning (~5 AM). It was very bright in the room which did indeed make it hard to sleep. No, theft wasn’t a concern – the occupiers weren’t vindictive.
@Charlie
How much do you not care that Farah is “dissapointed in you?”
Pretentious Hipster Hippies Damn the Man!! Screw the System! yadda yadda yadda | TDNCY
[...] are numerous decent articles about the situation, but this one is the best. Why were they doing this? Well, you can see their demands [...]
Where Dave Is » Blog Archive » 02/20 The Pretentiousness That Ate NYU: Part IV
[...] • Embedded reporter Charlie Eisenhood (who left the occupied zone late on the second night of occupati… [...]
All About Permanent Makeup And The Procedures - Mac Cosmetics Outlet
[...] Of Secret Meetings and Meager Eating: My Final Thoughts On The … [...]
NYU Local’s Charlie Eisenhood Named One of the UWIRE 100 | NYU Local
[...] coverage of the Kimmel Occupation was the definitive account, leading it to be linked by everyone from Gothamist to Daily Intel and [...]
NYU Local’s Charlie Eisenhood Named One of the UWIRE 100 | Politics News
[...] coverage of the Kimmel Occupation was the definitive account, leading it to be linked by everyone from Gothamist to Daily Intel and [...]
Philospher Peter Singer to Speak at Kimmel Tonight | NYU Local
[...] at Princeton, following the utilitarian school of thought. He is a strong advocate of the NYU’s rebel’s dietary quirk of choice – [...]
Charlie…I think I’m getting a little teary-eyed. If anyone ever says that great reporting is dead, I will immediately link them to this piece. Respect.