SUNDAY, MAY 12, 2024
More numbers from the Times: How many students got arrested for participating in the seizure of Columbia's Hamilton Hall?
This past Monday, we offered this instructive report on that very topic. That said:
This past Thursday, the New York Times published a new report on this general topic. Below, you see the headline which appeared in print editions—and you see a passage which took us by surprise:
Columbia Workers Recount Fearful Time Trapped in Hall
[...]
When the police eventually raided the building, nearly 50 people were arrested, according to prosecutors. Many of them were students at Columbia or its affiliated colleges, but a New York Times review of police records found that nine appeared to be unaffiliated with the university.
Say what? Fewer than 50 people were arrested? Nine of those people "appeared to be unaffiliated" with Columbia?
That would mean that forty arrestees, at the most, were actual Columbia students. That seemed to differ from the numbers we included in our own report—a report which had been based on numbers we got from the New York Times.
We clicked the link on Thursday's report in the Times. When we did, we were taken to the very same news report on which we'd based our own report.
That original Times report had included am array of numbers. Its initial jumble of numbers involved people arrested inside Hamilton Hall along with people arrested elsewhere as part of the Columbia action.
That said, sure enough! If you read all the way to paragraphs 26 and 27 of that original Times report, you find the numbers in question. This was the headline, and the passage in question, from the original Times report:
Outsiders Were Among Columbia Protesters, but They Dispute Instigating Clashes
[...]
During a news briefing on Thursday, Columbia’s vice president for communications, Ben Chang, said figures supplied by the New York Police Department about those accused of occupying Hamilton Hall had confirmed the expectations of university leaders that many of the participants were not connected with Columbia.
“A significant portion of those who broke the law and occupied Hamilton Hall were outsiders,” said Mr. Chang, who said the figures showed that 13 of the nearly four dozen people arrested in the takeover were not affiliated with Columbia.
But the Times review of police records revealed a slightly different picture, showing that just nine of those people had no apparent ties to the university. The rest were current or former undergraduate or graduate students or university employees, The Times found. It was not clear why the university’s numbers differed.
So it said, near the end of that original report from the Times.
Apparently, "nearly four dozen" people were arrested inside Hamilton Hall. Of that group, the Times said that nine had no apparent ties to the university. That left maybe forty who did.
Our point today is simple:
As we noted in our earlier report, there are more than 36,000 students on the rolls at Columbia. If the Times' account is accurate, it means that something like 39 of those students, and almost surely fewer, were arrested inside Hamilton Hall.
That means that we're down to something like one-tenth of one percent of the total student enrollment. But dear God! How the squeaky wheel does get the grease, given the norms of our journalistic culture!
None of this tells us if the students who seized Hamilton Hall were morally "right" or morally "wrong" in what they did. It does tell us this:
At Columbia, the ginormous majority of students were not inside Hamilton Hall during this extremely high-profile action. The same phenomenon played out at other colleges and universities as various types of protests led to arrests.
A tiny minority of Columbia students were involved in the seizure of Hamilton Hall. Sensible news coverage should include that extremely basic fact.
That would be sensible news coverage. Our floundering nation's bollixed coverage almost never did.
That's especially true on the Fox News Channel, where you'd think that all the brainwashed kids have gone wild. That said, it's also true pretty much everywhere else.
The numbers create a bit of perspective. The numbers have rarely appeared.
ReplyDelete"It does tell us this:
At Columbia, the ginormous majority of students were not inside Hamilton Hall during this extremely high-profile action."
I don't think it does, necessarily. How do you know if everyone inside Hamilton Hall was arrested? How do you know that a bunch of people didn't leave Hamilton Hall just before the police invaded it?
There are 36,000 students at Columbia. Almost all of them weren't in Hamilton Hall.
DeletePerhaps. But this meaningless factoid has nothing to do with number of students and and non-students arrested.
DeleteIt's a deeply meaningful fact. Vary few students occupied Hamilton Hall.
DeleteYou don't know that. To say that it probably was only a small portion of 36,000 enrolled doesn't amount to "very few".
DeleteAnd what's "very few" to you? 50? 100? 300?
How many actively protested in Kent State on May 4, 1970? Wikipedia says 300. Is it "very few"?
I think Somerby’s point (which I agree with) is that the media (Fox in particular) reports on a very small number of students who are “occupying” or “trespassing” and blows it out of proportion, making it look like a widespread thing with all the students.
DeleteOf course, Somerby didn’t complain, but rather urged the mainstream media to follow suit, when Fox had a burning building on endless loop during the George Floyd protests.
It is a widespread thing now; see this, for example:
Deletehttps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/pro-palestinian-college-protests-encampments.html
Look at the map. Why be obsessed with Columbia and its Hamilton Hall?
How do you know that a bunch of people didn't leave Hamilton Hall just before the police invaded it?
DeleteBecause we watched it all live on TV and nobody left, the media had the place pretty well scoped out.
Lol. And it was probably about one tenth of one percent of students at those other schools, too. It was blown out of proportion. And of course it was presented as damaging to Biden.
DeleteWhy does this matter?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't. This blog is a waste of your time.
DeleteYes, one tenth of 1 per cent is a small number. An even smaller number is 0.4 tenths of 1 per cent.
ReplyDeleteWho knows why this is an important number?
All numbers are important.
DeleteBeing arrested in one thing. But, I would like to know what punishment was meted out to those arrested?
ReplyDeleteDid they get a fine, which was paid by whoever is financially supporting the encampments? I believe a conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor is a felony. Were the arrestees charged with a conspiracy to trespass? Were they charged at all, or simply released? I wish our media would answer these questions.
Shouldn't they get trials before they're punished?
DeleteThrow the book at them, eh, David? But, for the love of God, let Trump skate.
DeleteMy sister made a similar response today, so I am sympathetic to @1:24. But her/his response does not make sense to me. First of all, Trump has nothing to do with how the demonstrators should be punished. Second, Trump is being vigorously prosecuted for his alleged crimes.
DeleteTrump’s trials are going slowly. If elected, he can shut his federal cases down. Let’s go just as easy on naughty students.
DeleteDavid, I believe 1:24 was addressing you specifically. YOU. YOU would throw the book at the protestors. YOU. YOU want trump to skate. YOU. You dumb bastard.
Delete2:16, people keep assuming trump could shut down the federal cases if elected. But how exactly could he do that? These cases are already in the system. Indictments have been brought by grand juries. There has to be a wall of separation between the chief executive and the justice department. Why hasn't President Biden pardoned his own son who is being treated unjustly by the prosecutor?
DeleteBiden is not corrupt.
DeleteThe president can pardon any defendant at any stage of the process. If Trump is president, he will pardon himself and any other defendant who's loyal to him.
Popeye -- I confess I am strongly opposed to demonstrators who disrupt universities, violate school rules and fail to follow city ordinances in order to show their support for ethnic cleansing and murder of Jews.
DeleteDavid, isn't that baldly overstating the position of the demonstrators? In other words, that is an unfair, hyperbolic characterization of the position of the demonstrators. They do not support for ethnic cleansing and murder of Jews. Actually, that's a really shitty thing for you to say. If you were here right now in front of me and said that I would kick your fucking ass.
Delete@5:58 They chant "From the River to the Sea." That explicitly means killing or driving out all Jews in Israel. They ignore the thousands of innocent Jewish civilians intentionally murdered, tortured, raped and kidnapped on Oct 6 in an unprovoked sneak attack during a cease fire agreement. They parrot Hamas slogans, even though Hamas wants to kill all Jews.
Delete@5:58 so you would kick my ass for complaining about the mass murder of Jews? Hmmm?
David and his Right-wing friends are correct: There's far too much free speech at our higher learning institutions. These university Presidents should take a "cancel culture" course.
Delete"From the river to the sea" does not explicitly mean killing or driving out all Jews in Israel. It doesn't say what's to become of the Jews. You think it means expulsion and killing because you can't imagine a country in the territory of Mandatory Palestine in which Jews, Muslims, and Christians live side by side at peace.
DeleteSorry, David. I couldn't hear you over all the Right-wing cheering for cancel culture at our universities.
Delete"@5:58 so you would kick my ass for complaining about the mass murder of Jews? Hmmm?"
DeleteHaven't you heard? There are good people on both sides.
We disagree with David, but we must not kick him.
Delete"@5:58 so you would kick my ass for complaining about the mass murder of Jews? Hmmm?"
DeleteNo, not for complaining about the mass murder of Jews. For making a grossly offensive and repugnant accusation that you know is false. You're using the mass murder of Jews to try to distort what is being protested which is immoral and disgusting. It's so, so offensive. Yes, I would stomp for your fucking face in, you fucking lying piece of shit
I'm sorry. Maybe I would not stomp your face in. I would just leave your presence and do my best to never enter it again, knowing that you had crossed the line with a despicable and disgusting lie about the demonstrators. The karmic blowback coming your way for such a lie doesn't need any help from me.
DeletePopeye - my comment simply expressed a desire for the media to provide more info.
DeleteIMO Trump did not commit a felony in NY. IMO Trump sincerely (albeit wrongly) believed that he won the 2020 election
@DiC
Delete"Being arrested in one thing. But, I would like to know what punishment was meted out to those arrested?"
What would satisfy you? Ten years? Twenty? Gibbeting?
@7:50 - I'm glad to know that you're not anti-semitic, but I don't agree with your interpretation. The slogan means that the area should be Judenrein. I use the German term because I see Hamas as no better than the Nazis morally. (Fortunately Hamas is not as effective as the Nazis were.) If the words "From the Rive to the sea" were unclear, Hamas's action on Oct 7 made the meaning clear.
DeleteBTW are you aware that Hamas's barbaric attacks were supported by most of the Gaza residents? Are you aware that 800,000 Jews were driven out of Arab countries in the last few decades? Are you aware that Christians are being driven out of Muslim countries in the middle east right now. Are you aware that Israel's neighbors tried to destroy Israel again and again, beginning with Day 1 of Israel's existence (although the attackers were not always the same groups.)
If Israel lost any of these wars, the country would have been totally destroyed. Currently Hamas and Hezbollah, supported and provoked by Iran, are trying to destroy Israel. Israel is fighting for its very existence.
Quaker - I meant exactly what I said. I don't now what's happening to the people being arrested, and I would like to know.
DeleteDavid, blatantly lying about what the protesters are protesting as you have here is a tactical error. When people see people who oppose protesters tell such blatant and obvious lies about them, it calls attention to their cause and may amplify the appeal of their message. It would be much better to confront the true reasons they are protesting and expose why they are misguided.
DeleteDavid, Israel is not fighting for its very existence. There is no chance Israel would ever be totally destroyed by any of those countries you mention because Israel is aligned with the richest, most powerful country in the history of the world that has packed the entire region full of military assets. Israel is not alone. They face a number of opponents but they don't face them alone. Hamas should be condemned and destroyed but they are not close to an existential threat. There are less people in Hamas than there at NYPD officers.
DeleteI agree with you @12:00. But, your comment doesn't quite contradict what said. Israel almost surely won't lose the war against Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran, because Israel is militarily strong enough to not lose. But, if Israel did lose, they would be gone.
DeleteGood suggestion @11:49. Aside from not knowing what their slogans mean, many protestors are ignorant of Israel's extraordinary efforts to protect civilians.
DeleteSome protestors accuse Israel of genocide. That's the exact opposite of the truth.
According to some military experts, in all of military history, no party has made greater efforts to protect enemy civilians during an urban war, even though this effort results in greater Israeli casualties.
Israel has done more to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza than any other known army in the world has, John Spencer, who is both chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point and a retired US military officer, argued in an extensive thread posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday.
In the thread, Spencer provided multiple examples of precautions that the IDF takes that he argued other armies do not, at least not to the same extent, or even at all. One of the most well-recognized instances of this that he mentioned is the way in which the IDF implements various methods of warning before commencing with an assault against Hamas.
OTOH Hamas maximizes harm to civilians in Gaza by hiding behind them
https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-784307
4:29:
DeleteConstitutional scholars do not agree that the President has the power to pardon himself. That is an absurd proposition and runs totally counter to our founding and system of government. If courts agree that the president can pardon himself, we might as well turn out the lights and close the door behind us.
10:49, it doesn't matter if he "sincerely" believed he won the election. What he did was criminal, and he has been duly charged with multiple felonies by a grand jury. He is too much of a lying coward to ever allow these cases to go forward before the election. He has a political hack judge in Florida who has completely stalled all movement in the slam dunk case of stolen documents, and the hacktacular supreme court is pretending to consider whether a president has the authority to assassinate a political rival under the cover of "official acts" of the president.
Delete@6:15 AM
Delete"...we might as well turn out the lights and close the door behind us"
That would be nice, but I doubt you'd leave. Most likely, you'll stay and keep annoying everyone with your perpetual faux outrage.
6:15:
DeleteI asked a question. people keep assuming trump could shut down the federal cases if elected. But how exactly could he do that?
Someone suggested trump could pardon himself. I replied that isn't a viable option. And then you joined in to show us what an asshole you are.
Mary Wells Lawrence, Yvonne Mokgoro, and Colleen Barrett have died.
ReplyDeleteyou're a weirdo
DeleteThis might be a good day for Somerby to say something nice about his mother.
ReplyDeleteBob should commend his mother by mentioning that she never birthed or raised Anonymouse 11:36am.
DeleteOr Agamemnon.
DeleteMothers don't matter. A couple of homosexual men can pay off a birthing person to serve as a machine, take the infant from his machine immediately, and do what they will to the child after they've already done the unthinkable by wounding the child for life on the day of his birth.
DeleteToday the Washington Post even had a story about such a touching experience headlined "Our daughter wanted a mommy, so she picked one of her dads."
Want more of this? Vote Democrat!
Mothers do matter, but it doesn't matter who provides the mothering. A couple of homosexual men can be as good at parenting as heterosexual birth parents, grandparents, aunts or uncles or siblings, adoptive parents, lesbian parents, single parents, a village, or anyone else who is able to meet that child's needs. Studies show that homosexual men are as good as heterosexual couples at raising children. The crass language of calling women birth machines or stating that a child is wounded for life by being born, is propagandistic. There are all kinds of families.
DeleteWant more bigotry? Vote Republican.
Babies don't need mothers. Democrats are enlightened enough to recognize this.
DeleteBabies are running the RNC.
Deletewhich is worse: being raised by two people of the same gender or by a mother who apparently wasn't interested in raising you and was willing to give you up for money?
DeleteWhich is worse, being slapped on the hard hairy chest of a homosexual man after your birth and soothed in your infancy by the male bodies and male voices and lack of maternal instinct of the males who bought you, or being abandoned in the forest to wolves?
DeleteYou're right. It is worse.
Deletemen have paternal instinct
Deletewhich is worse: a political party that thinks people should have the right to make these kinds of decisions amongst themselves or a political party that wants to enforce their vision of what a "proper" family consists of on everyone else? The GOP: the new nanny state
ReplyDelete"new"
DeleteLOL.
"JD VANCE: I don't think anybody could look at the presidency and the conduct of Donald Trump and say, this is a person who's somehow antisemitic.
ReplyDeleteDANA BASH: He had dinner with Nick Fuentes, who is an avowed antisemite."
Getting cold-cocked by Dana Bash. LOL!
I don't see what Somerby sees in this clown, as he continues to step on rakes.
Trump has credentials that show him to be the least antisemitic President of all time. No other President comes close to matching his record.
Delete-- Trump gave total support to Israel
-- Trump welcomed a Jewish son-in-law into his family
-- accepts and loves his Jewish daughter and grandchildren
-- Trump received the Zionist Organization of America’s highest honor on Sunday – the Theodore Herzl Gold Medallion – for his actions on behalf of the State of Israel.
-- Former U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday received an award from the Israel Heritage Foundation in appreciation of his efforts to forge normalization agreements between the Jewish state and four Arab nations under the guise of the Abraham Accords.
-- Trump received the Tree of Life Award, the highest humanitarian award the Jewish National Fund presents to one individual or family each year in appreciation of their outstanding community involvement, their dedication to the cause of American-Israeli friendship, and their devotion to peace and the security of human life.
So, then, why does he hang around with Nick Fuentes and encourage neo Nazis? Can this perhaps be more complex than simple support for Israel?
DeleteThe consolation for Trump winning the election in November is the look on David in Cal's face as he is ushered into the cattle car with the rest of the Jews.
DeleteYou could make a fortune selling that photo at TDH.
DeleteBTW if the Palestinians did control all the area from the river to the sea, that is, all of Israel, it would not only be "cleansed" of Jews, it would probably be "cleansed" of Christians and it would certainly be "cleansed" of gays. There is a strange group called Queers for Palestine. Do these people not know that if they tried to live among the Palestinians they'd be killed? Why do they demonstrate in favor of people who would murder them if they got the chance? Can someone explain that?
ReplyDeleteAliyah, Dave. Make aliyah.
ReplyDelete<"text-align: center;">Maynard
ReplyDelete