By Cliff Potts
Dateline: August 20, 2025


When coverage comes late, wrong, and slanted — it’s not an accident. It’s the playbook.

In Washington, D.C., the sound of pounding Go-Go beats rolls down U Street. In another time, national cameras would call it a rally, a march, a protest. Today, it’s billed simply as a “music festival.” Behind the euphemism lies a calculated adaptation: activists in multiple U.S. cities are rebranding demonstrations to evade social media suppression and sidestep official scrutiny.

A Protest by Any Other Name

Organizers in D.C., Los Angeles, Portland, and New York City report that labeling events as “protests” online now triggers platform moderation, algorithmic downranking, and in some cases removal of event pages. The workaround is linguistic. Instead of “march against federal overreach,” listings read “block party,” “art parade,” or “music festival.”

The effect is twofold: it keeps authorities guessing while allowing information to spread under the radar. “We watched the original event page disappear in hours,” said one D.C. organizer, “but when we changed the title to ‘Go-Go Unity Festival,’ it stayed up for weeks” (Rosenberg, 2025).

The Blackout in Action

While local coverage of these events still appears — the Washington City Paper, Portland Mercury, and L.A. community outlets have all run small features — national networks have been notably silent. A survey by the Media Democracy Project found that protests involving thousands of people in June and July 2025 received less than 2% of the airtime given to comparable demonstrations five years ago (MDP, 2025).

Instead, mentions of “protest” often appear buried in political analysis about federal policing power, never in breaking news banners. In some cases, images of rallies have been repurposed without captions explaining their political nature.

Lessons from Occupy — and the Media’s Failure

For veterans of the Occupy movement, the déjà vu is undeniable. In 2011, large-scale demonstrations in New York, Oakland, Chicago, and dozens of other cities went underreported for weeks. When coverage finally arrived, it was often riddled with errors, dismissive language, and selective framing that stripped the movement of its legitimacy. As Occupy organizers documented, this wasn’t negligence — it mirrored authoritarian-state tactics to distort dissent for domestic consumption.

“This is part of the fascist playbook,” said one former Occupy media liaison. “First they ignore you. Then they belittle you. Then they show up late, shoot the wrong angle, and tell the wrong story.”

Activists warn that if national newsrooms repeat this pattern now, they will destroy what little trust remains between the press and the communities they claim to cover. In past movements, that erosion meant camera crews arriving to hostility rather than open access — a reality news organizations would do well to remember before the damage becomes irreversible.

History Repeats in Code

This is not new. Under authoritarian regimes in Latin America during the 1970s, anti-government protests were often staged as “folk festivals” or “agricultural fairs” to avoid police bans (Foweraker, 1990). In Eastern Europe, musicians performed “solidarity concerts” that doubled as organizing hubs for opposition movements (Kenney, 2003).

By borrowing from this playbook, U.S. activists are creating parallel public spaces — events with the appearance of celebration, but the substance of dissent.

Why It Matters

The rebranding tactic reveals two converging realities:

  1. Protest coverage is being deprioritized in national newsrooms — whether for political, editorial, or audience-retention reasons.
  2. Digital platforms are actively or algorithmically suppressing mobilization language, forcing movements to adapt or vanish from the feed.

As legal challenges to federal overreach build — from D.C.’s fight over policing control to L.A.’s pushback against ICE raids — the streets are telling a parallel story. That story is now playing out behind the façade of cultural celebration.

The question is whether the public will recognize the tactic for what it is — and whether a nation that prides itself on free assembly will notice when its demonstrations disappear from view.

References

Foweraker, J. (1990). Popular mobilization in Mexico: The teachers’ movement, 1977–87. Cambridge University Press.

Kenney, P. (2003). A carnival of revolution: Central Europe 1989. Princeton University Press.

Media Democracy Project. (2025). National protest coverage audit. Retrieved from https://www.mediademocracy.org

Rosenberg, T. (2025, July 22). Digital sleight of hand: How U.S. activists are renaming protests to beat the algorithm. Washington City Paper.

Discover more from WPS News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.