Actually, it took 38 minutes for that change to happen. The first story is 47 minutes ago, the second is nine minutes ago. The times at the top of the page pertain to when the front page was updated; the numbers with the story pertain to when the story itself was updated.

looks like al baker is the asshole in this situation

“Why believe the protesters and field reporter instead of the NYT’s editors?” Dunno… not like the NYT’s editors lied to the US about Iraq’s nuclear/chemical weapons being a great reason to start a $5 trillion war and kill well over 100,000 Iraqi people. Either way, the police closed down one side of bridge traffic first, they had a huge number of buses ready to take hundreds of people to jail, you think it wasn’t their plan all along? Oh, because they said it wasn’t then that must be true? Obviously they wouldn’t lie about something like having unethical motives.

sigh, this cannot end well…

I was arrested on the bridge on Saturday. Although there is video evidence that shows police warning the people at the head of the march not to enter the roadway, even in the video the announcement can barely be heard. Perhaps only the first few dozen people of the 3000-strong march heard the order. Personally, marching about halfway back, I followed those in front of me thinking that we were sticking to the NYPD-endorsed route. On the bridge itself, police blocked the marchers on both sides with orange netting. They issued an order to disperse, but short of jumping off the bridge, it was impossible to exit as the police continued to block both sides. We were then arrested one by one - 700 in total. I believe that multiple officers should have been posted at the entrance to the bridge, continuously and clearly warning marchers of the repercussions if they continued. When a dispersal order was issued, protestors should have been given time and the physical option to comply.

Buzzfeed, you’re embarrassing yourself. if you’re going to get every story from reddit, bother to do some additional research - at LEAST read the comments. the first story was probably some writer rushing to put out a story without all the facts so they assumed the best of the protesters in that they were just arrested for marching but later found out the details/truth (1. they were NOT escorted by officers 2. they didn’t keep to the clear rules given to them - to stay off the road) and corrected it.

Because the NYPD are really going to allow a street fair to block an artery of the middle class. News to OWS protesters: you’re attacking the people who would support you. How about blocking up WALL STREET on a Monday morning? Damn, I really really want to support these protests, but they keep doing stupid things (like not having an actual agenda, unlike Madison) that I have serious reservations about.

This is rather misleading. From what I understand, the police allowed the protestors onto the bridge, on the condition that they stay on the pedestrian walkway, but since some of the protestors decided to walk on the roadway, blocking a lane of traffic, the offending protestors were arrested. Or was it really entrapment?