cheesebikini?: Coverage of the Fourth Manhattan Flash Mob

July 16, 2003

Coverage of the Fourth Manhattan Flash Mob

UPDATE: Our Senior Manhattan Correspondent David Danzig made a video of the mob. It's a 5.5 Megabyte download; get it here. David badly needs help serving up the video. If you have a little extra bandwidth and server space and you wouldn't mind mirroring the file, please contact David (david [at] danzig.com).

The fourth New York City flash mob headed to a hoity-toity fancy-pants SoHo shoe store, where participants pretended they were on a bus tour from Maryland, and acted excited yet bewildered about the whole thing.

For more great photos, visit Satan's Laundromat and moistandtasty.com and Happy Robot. For more details about this flash mob, see David Danzig's description. Bravo, New York.

Were you there? Post links to your coverage in the comments below.

Posted by sean at July 16, 2003 07:49 PM | TrackBack (1)

Comments

Sorry these pictures are so late, but tonight was so much fun, we didn't want it to stop! It really was. Zip over to my site for some more photos. Please feel free to grab them and re-post if you like.

Fred

Posted by: Fred on July 16, 2003 09:22 PM

Got a load of pics, including one of the New York Times reporter as she was turned away.

http://fancyrobot.typepad.com

Posted by: Dave on July 16, 2003 09:53 PM

More here!

http://www.moistandtasty.com/mob_1.html

Posted by: Jane Minty on July 16, 2003 10:16 PM

we have one nice wide shot from the store:
mob 4 crowd

Posted by: :r on July 17, 2003 07:38 AM

Okay, Boston, let's step up:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bostoncitymob/

Posted by: boston mobbers on July 17, 2003 07:57 AM

The photographers really kinda ruined the purpose of it which, for me anyway, is to wake people up a bit from their normal routine and get them to question what's around them- John Cagean fashion (works for the mobsters as well as the spectators).

I really shouldn't talk, though, because at the same time the photographers and reporters made it exciting in a different way: I feel guiltfully excited about the fact that I may find my picture in the NY Times this week- the blond photographer's assistant got my name and my friend's name. Kinda scary.

Posted by: binnorie on July 17, 2003 09:14 AM

I hear you binnorie, but I don't think you can control the fact that photographers will want to show up at these things. These things aren't about control, right? So you just can take the photographers as a given and build around them, or better yet use them to your advantage... So if -you- plan an event, build them into your schtick.

As far as being scared of showing up in the press, put it this way: if I were in the Witness Protection Program I'd stay far away from flash mobs.

Posted by: sean on July 17, 2003 09:20 AM

further pics:
http://morland.theoretic.org/gallery_mob4

Posted by: morland on July 17, 2003 09:46 AM

I think the problem is more with people hanging out and not dispersing afterward than those with cameras. I like that the MOBs are being documented, and I agree that to an extent these things cannot be controlled, and perhaps shouldn't be. Still, I do think the frequency of the MOBs might make them more vulnerable to faddishness and mutation by those who don't fully grok the original concept.

Posted by: Ginger on July 17, 2003 12:58 PM

Just did the SF Mob and reading about yours.

The way I see it, let the press take pics. But don't grant them interviews. That defeats the purpose of the Mob, which is appear, do.... something, then disburse WITHOUT A TRACE.

Just my opinion.

Posted by: on July 17, 2003 04:34 PM

I had a great time at the manhattan mob, but people definately had a problem dispersing. I think some we bystanders who were still trying to figure out what was going on. They need to institute a code for when to leave eg. " THE TOUR BUS IS LEAVING"

my 2 cents

Posted by: anon on July 17, 2003 08:48 PM

This is very strange; you're at least the third person to have complained to me that this particular New York flash mob didn't disperse properly.

My first thought when I hear that is: well -why- did people not disperse? If anyone can tell my why, you should be able to tell me why, because you obviously stuck around to observe other people failing to disperse. (So why did -you- not disperse? And what would make you disperse next time?)

Posted by: sean on July 17, 2003 10:12 PM

My coverage can be found here.

I think as these things get bigger, people are going to need more precise instructions. The idea to specify exactly when pictures are permissible and when they are not is a good idea; even if not everyone follows the instructions precisely, at least they'll be surreptitious about their picture taking.

I agree that having the press turn up is beyond the organizers' (or the participants') control, but definitely, refusing interviews would at very least keep the mob idea fresh and intriguing.

Perhaps pre-arranged signals would be a good idea, and would give organizers increased control over each event.

Stuff like "don't go into the shoe store until you see a young man wearing an orange t-shirt and a mohawk walk in" would ensure that no one enters before time (which is one complaint I read regarding mob #4).

Or tell people "At 6:18, leave the shoe store and walk quickly towards Broadway and disperse." I think people need direction and signals. Having someone announce that the tour bus was leaving would probably be a good idea too.

Posted by: Samantha on July 18, 2003 01:12 PM

My friend, who lives in Westchester County forwarded me this recent article about Mob#4.

http://www.thejournalnews.com/newsroom/072003/e0120mob.html

Posted by: dimples on July 21, 2003 11:24 AM

I finally got mine developed (yes, developed) and scanned from MOB#4.
Here they are:
happyrobot.net/photofun

Posted by: rich on July 21, 2003 06:37 PM

I wasn't at #4, but I *did* disperse immediately after #3! :)

Posted by: Ginger on July 24, 2003 02:56 PM

Posted by: Terry on July 17, 2005 04:11 AM