IMPORTANT: A respectful request to all activists regarding Mark "Stone"

In the wake of the Mark "Stone" story breaking in the mainstream media yesterday, a lot of journalists are trying their best to dig out all the gorey personal details. They are phoning up lots of activists and trying to find out more information. You may be one of those activists.

You are requested not to give any information to the media. Just say "sorry, I don't know anything about that". Be aware that journalists might pretend to be someone else. They will do whatever it takes to get their story. Keep your guard.

There are many people who have been badly affected by this whole thing in different ways. It's important that this outrageous police behaviour is talked about in the media, but it's also important that we all respect people's privacy, and don't just feed the tabloids.

Please rest assured that a number of people know what's going on and are doing their best to deal with the media side of things in a way which is political and not personal.

Thank you

Someone

Comments

Hide the following 15 comments

Alternatively...

11.01.2011 15:47

...feed them complete misinformation! Make up outrageous stories about him with fictitious names, etc.

anon

Alternatively...Not

11.01.2011 18:50

Whilst anon's comment sounds like a nice bit of mischief, be very very careful. What if you give them a false name which, unknown to you, is actually somebody's real name who is connected to the movement? Then your little laugh has ended somebody right in it. And for what? A bit of a laugh at the media's expense? A small price for you, a large price for your unwitting victim. This might sound like an unlikely scenario, but could happen, and on something as serious a this, just not worth the risk.

No comment is the best reply.

Give them the name and address of their editor

11.01.2011 19:34

They will certainly be on the state payroll.

stoopid

agree wtih okay

11.01.2011 20:53

Yep, I actually did this once - I my younger days when stopped by the police, I picked a pseudonym out of the air, Only a few years down the line did I find out that another movement had a well known person of the same name. Gotta be careful about these things...

unnecessary

It's a little more complicated than just "don't talk"...

11.01.2011 22:57

So we are 'requested not to give any info to the media' - requested by who?

Given that Mark Kennedy spent 7 years reporting to his superiors, there is nothing anyone is likely to say that would not already be known to the police.

Some things should be talked about publicly. There are important questions to ask about whether having undercover cops among green protesters makes any sort of sense, and in particular whether it is even legal for an undercover officer to enter into a sexual relationship while on duty and while pretending to be a completely different person. The Met needs to be held to account for what happened, and unfortunately the best way to hold the Met accountable is to get a lot of publicity.

On the other hand it's very important to show solidarity to those who were closest to Kennedy before he was found out. I would say that out of solidarity for those involved don't talk to cops about the friendships and relationships that Kennedy was involved in, unless you first talk to those people and make sure it's OK.

maya

Let's keep this simple

11.01.2011 23:46

If you know, or think you know, of someone who was close enough to Mark to be hurt by their association, just keep quiet about it, especially while the press is in feeding frenzy mode. Definitely don't talk to journos about it, but also try not to blab about it in general. Let's exercise a bit of collective discipline and protect our mates from press intrusion.

Silas

Nobody should be talking to the media

12.01.2011 09:54

But requests like this might be taken more seriously if others (Simon Lewis, Sophie Stevens, Ratcliffe defendants, Alessio from the Wombles, and Stone's mates in Notts) kept their big mouths shut.

Jones

Difference between personal and political

12.01.2011 12:38

There are plenty of things about Mark Stone / Kennedy that I am willing to talk about with the press. There are plenty of things that I am not.

It's pretty straightforward really, and just means focusing on his role in the movement, and avoiding his interactions with people on a personal level.

Someone else

Thanks for the Advice!

12.01.2011 13:34

Just to be clear we shouldnt tlk to anyone from the media as we need to protect your exclusive with the Guardian!

Hopefully the funds will come in handy!

BobSchmenge

Media

12.01.2011 14:44

As I understand it, the Guardian had already put two and two together about Kennedy and the collapsed trial, and were going to run with the story regardless. Some of the defendants found out and so contacted the Guardian to try to get quotes in to try to improve whatever they were going to write, steer it away from personal stuff and make it as political and anti-police as possible. A similar thing happened with Newsnight.

Whether or not you agree with this tactic, I'm pretty sure they acted in good faith. I wish they'd also put stuff up on Indymedia, but there you go.

another person

they come in many guises

12.01.2011 19:14

Scumbag journos looking for a salacious story may well not introduce themselves as such.

They may pretend to be an old mate of the person they want info on, or their family or employer or tutor or whatever.

They may say they got your number from someone you trust, they may start out by calling you by your first name and, before you've had time to think, you've given away a crucial detail that puts them on to doing a shitty tittilating story that hurts our mates and distracts from the political reality.

deepthroat

police abuse is political not just political

12.01.2011 22:57

Glad to hear a group of people with their heads screwed on are dealing with the media side of things. That an undercover cop formed sexual relationships with activists is abuse, yes as an activist I expect there could be undercover cops in meetings but this kind of trespass into people's lives and emotions is really beyond the pale. This could have happened to any one of us, I hope this is really being followed up legally & in the media.

rhi

I second all that Maya has said.

13.01.2011 01:13

Isn't the personal political?

Infiltrators spend years in the closest circles of activists, spying on them and feeding information to the police and private companies. Finally, some hope that the public comes closer to realising what an Orwellian state we live in (unfortunately yes, through the mainstream media) - and what sort of scrutiny activists involved in non-violent direct action are subject to - and people are asked to shut up, because some other people know best how to deal with this.

Sorry, but this seems a little authoritarian and patronising.

Here we are given the chance to raise fundamental questions about policing ethics and codes of conduct, growing inter-state collaboration to monitor and tackle activist movements, the frequent use of agent provocateurs... etc. etc. Stuff we have to deal with as activists, but usually meets very little public understanding...

However, I do agree that utmost respect should be shown to those who were closest to him and issues concerning them should not be discussed without their consent.

S.son

what are social movements for?

13.01.2011 02:31

sorry, but mark was active in 22 countries.
smart people know what to say and what not to say to the press. some of us anarchists have been doing alternative/indy as well as mainstream media for a long time. face it, without the very good reporting of the Guardian, this case could completely die in the eyes of the mainstream public, 99% of which have never heard of IMC, or would freak out if they read it, like your mother/grandma. however, with the international spotlight now, bbc and others doing decent reporting (alongside shit yellow press), now maybe somethings will change.

how do you think social movements can work to check runaway cops in the future?

i want to protect people hurt by mark, but also see if we can get all past cases where mark was involved reopened. possibly other activists could get out of prison if past "evidence" from mark would be thrown out. why does nobody mention this important aspect?
HELLO!

also, what about protecting other people in the future? you can bet your ass that mark is shitting bricks now. it is for sure that whatever "handlers" and high ups were managing mark, are immediately changing their guidelines. yes, never trust a cop, but also don't be blinded about how massive public pressure, in the media and on the streets, can bring change.

otherwise, you might as well just give up now.

right?

experienced

double standards

13.01.2011 14:33

I'm a little disgruntled by the implication that the collection of self-promoting media types (the usual faces) are capable of making sensible decisions about what to say to the media, but the rest of us are simply told to keep schtum.

Either:
-tell everyone to keep their mouth shut, including the media junkies or
-allow anyone to speak to the media (which doesn't prevent you from suggesting advice/guidelines about pitfalls to avoid, sensitivity to those most affected etc).

Otherwise it's just the usual cliqueyness all over again.

anti-clique patrol