It was early yesterday morning that I posted this missive about how political parties should deal with the talentless hacks from Canada's lunatic media showing up at their events unannounced and uninvited, and rule number one was -- simply say no. Go on, read what I wrote ... that's what I wrote. So it's delicious to see the Liberal Party doing exactly as I advised, as you can see from the first 30 seconds of this video, where Rebel News' useless mouthpiece and David Menzies-wannabe Tamara Ugolini is told, "You're not invited."
And tell me I didn't call it precisely when I claimed that the Rebel News hack would try to engage the gatekeeper in demanding an explanation or arguing about rationale or what have you, and that said gatekeeper should stick to his guns and just keep saying no, which is precisely what Ben Smith did, to his credit.
In fairness, I watched only the first half-minute or so to revel in my advice being implemented so deliciously, so if things changed later on, well, whatever. But from the snippet I saw, it would appear that my strategy is the perfect way to deal with these dingbats.
You're welcome.
P.S. OK, I sucked it up and watched a little more of that video, and it's just creepy how closely it plays out compared to my earlier piece. Good God, Ugolini admits to showing up without getting a confirmation of accreditation (which I expressly warned about), and even describes Ben Smith as a "gatekeeper" (the very adjective I used). And I explicitly cautioned said gatekeeper about engaging said hack about reasons for rejection and, for the most part, Smith pulled it off.
Man, I'm good at this.
P.P.S. OK, I sacrificed minutes of my life to watch almost all of that video and, other than that it was the depressingly-untalented Tamara Ugolini rather than David Menzies, tell me that this paragraph I wrote early yesterday morning doesn't describe perfectly how all that played out:
I am available as a political consultant for reasonable rates. Oh, and check back later when I explain the concept of trespassing.
FURTHER MUSINGS ... I just realized another protective strategy that absolutely should be used to deal with nonsense like this. During Ugolini's plaintive whining, she admits that, while she sent e-mail asking about details for the event, she received no reply, so she decided to go. This was a (minor?) mistake on the organizer's part.
Yes, we all agree, when one receives an application for event accreditation from any of the worthless yobs at Der Rebel, it's tempting to just point it at the Trash bucket and move on with life.
Don't do that.
By ignoring the application, you are simply opening the door for said fake journo to show up and bitch and whine about never getting a reply. Rather, the proper response is to reply, but keep it short and courteous:
Dear <Whatever>: Thank you for your application for media accreditation for this event. Unfortunately, your application has not been approved.
Thank you.
That's it; brevity is the key, and under no circumstances get personal, such as, "And by the way, your media outlet blows dead bears." Simply reject the application politely, and make sure the gatekeeper is aware that this was done, so that when Menzies or Ugolini -- or some other worthless hack -- shows up, you say quite sweetly, "Yes, we know you applied, and I know your application was refused, so what are you doing here?"
Doing this just ups the humiliation factor even higher, and that's what we're all about here.
You're welcome.
OFFS ... just when you thought Ugolini couldn't be even more of a reprehensible prevaricator, here she is, blaming it all on sexism:
7 comments:
It didn't go *quite* according to your script. While "gatekeeper" Ben Smith did well at the beginning, sticking to his line of "You're not invited," about five minutes in, he let his annoyance get the better of him, telling Ugolini that Rebel Media wan't welcome because they were associated with the "alt-right", which opened the door for her to go all, "Why, whatever do you mean by that?", which admittedly is exactly what you warned people not to do.
Other than that, yup, that seems to be the way to deal with these fake journalists. Good job.
Same anonymous as above: Just had another thought as to how to handle these people. All of these fakers love to describe themselves as "independent media," as if it gives them instant credibility. That's when the gatekeepers should say, "You're not 'media,' you're a lady with a microphone."
This whole idea of "independent media" needs to be crushed.
That video accompanied by this blog post should be required viewing and reading for anyone who is going to be manning the entrance desk at a political event, and who suspects Rebel News is going to show up unannounced and unregistered to cause a scene.
I agree with the first comment. It was enough for the gatekeeper to simply say Ugolini did not have an invitation. His mistake was in telling her why ("Rebel News") - then makes it worse saying the reason behind that decision ("because you associate with alt-right and far-right groups").
Ugolini's own mistakes are many, beginning with the claim that she was "physically prevented" from attending the event. Any editor would've caught this - "prevented" is enough - but then I expect Der Rebel would like us to believe she was manhandled. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if "physically prevented" is part of their style guide.
Ugolini goes on to claim she wasn't invited because she isn't "affiliated with state-sponsored media" when that was not what she was told. HUGE error there. I expect Levant would rather she'd said the reason was that she's with Rebel News (and then pass around the hat).
About that affiliation, a woman with a Rebel Media email address, holding a Rebel News mic twice describes herself as an "independent journalist."
The fun part of the video comes at 4:24 when a woman who WAS invited asks the gatekeeper's name, prompting Ugolini: "Well that's a great question. Yes, what is your name?"
First of the Five W's, Ms Ugolini. First of the Five W's.
More comedy gold comes at 9:35 with a pitch for money slipped into the middle of a supposed news story.
It's the Rebel way, of course.
Comedy gold.
The problem lies in the assumption that the Rebel is actually seeking to conduct interviews with political leaders, and being denied access because of their "tough questions."
That's not their goal. Their goal is be DENIED access, to kick up an indignant fuss on camera, then to scurry back to their laptop and post yet another story about their "oppression".
This is abundantly clear from those rare instances where they do, in fact, sneak or bully their way through security. Like a dog chasing a bus and actually catching up with it, their little squad of amateurs don't have a CLUE how to conduct an adult interview with politician. I recall Ezra fighting tooth and nail for access to a press conference for his pet baby-face Nazi; and when his lawyers (I believe the cost was $80,000) won him access, the burning question Keean asked was: "Which African Heads of State have you contacted to apologize for wearing blackface?", a question of such astonishing imbecility that one wonders if the confused little cherub made it up on the spot.
That being the case - the fact that the Rebel's real goal is not to gain access they wouldn't know how to use, but to whine about their exclusion - your strategy serves their purpose perfectly well. Menzies, Drea, Sheila or any of the clown brigade, denied access or credentials, will simply show up, grow increasing abusive and possible physical, and finally breach the perimeter (as we saw Dave and Drea do), forcing their physical removal and providing footage of them being "brutalized". It's nonsense, of course, but it's the kind of theatrical pablum their rage-addicted followers pay for.
5:18 is interesting:
Gatekeeper: "Rebel Media associates with far-right and alt-right groups."
Ugolini: "Yeah, so???"
I can't believe no one suggested the most obvious way to banish Rebelers from their events. Yes, if they apply for accreditation, there should be a reply, but the reply should be along the lines of, "Thank you for your application. It is our policy that no one from Rebel News will be accredited for any of our events for the foreseeable future, due to the pattern of provocation, confrontation and violence that inevitably accompanies a Rebel News journalist, to the point where security must intervene or the police must be called."
The reply can go on to list various examples of the above just to drive home the point, and might finish with, "If anyone from Rebel News shows up at our event, they will be escorted out immediately, and if they refuse to leave, police will be called."
Sure, this sounds in-your-face, but if it's done this way, then Ezra can't claim they're being discriminated against just because they "ask the tough questions no one else will ask." It will be clear that no one wants them around because they always bring trouble with them.
Let's see them get a reply like that, and still have the courage to show up and take a chance. I'd pay to watch that.
Post a Comment