Got the feedback of one of my assignments, the article on squatters.I didn’t describe any particular squat and that has played well against my mark.
I complained that the tutor didn’t suggest me to do this before handing it in, but then I do think that I wouldn’t have done it anyway.
I don’t like this tendency of both mainstream and alternative media of focusing on particular persons and cases to make a point – the wicked human interest. Yes, it is more interesting, or – should we say entertaining. Or even morbid? ok- first instance where I have been marked down for my too out-of-place practices.
So, for the next one, I have given a brief overview of the anti capitalist protests so far. Oh my god, no mention of violence! (Shock horror). “You will sure be marked down for that too”. Well, his mouth didn’t pronounce these words, but his eyes certainly did. This time I do get the proper feedback. Counting as “sympathetic, friendly” advice from “some one nice”, I get told almost word for word what I should be writing: “these demonstrations were characterised by violent attacks by anarchists, and in Genoa the violence escalated to such extreme, one demonstrator was shot dead”. I really can’t understand. People just can’t listen when you say you want to talk about the ‘issues’?? If editors are this thick/biased/clever, I am beginning to understand the state of affairs in the rich world’s media even better now.
Moral of the story: never, ever trust any one who wants to talk/write about any protest or movement for a commercial medium. Not even, or specially still, myself.
