Police Chief Brian O’Hara’s Statement: Unnecessary but Accurate
The New York Post Exists to Sell Controversy and Hair Spray
A Familiar Tabloid Playbook
The Bonfire of the Vanities by Tom Wolfe offers a cultural primer to New York City. It captures the city’s greed, racial tensions, class divisions, and media sensationalism through the story of Sherman McCoy, a wealthy bond trader whose mistress seriously injures a Black teenager in a hit-and-run accident in the Bronx.
Panicked about what might be reported—and whether either of them has been identified—McCoy first turns to the New York Times, then the Daily News, and finally, he sneaks a look at a New York Post someone left behind at a shoeshine stand.
He’s too embarrassed to be seen reading it. Anyone familiar with the news hierarchy knows the Post exists to titillate the masses, not to inform. A self-styled “Master of the Universe” like McCoy would be humiliated if a colleague caught him with a copy.
The “News” as Merchandise
The New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch and serves as one of many tools in his Fox media empire used to provoke controversy. The motivations are predatory and reflect the crass commercialism that defines much of the mainstream media.
Murdoch, like many billionaire media owners, aims to present his opinions as fact—and employs reporters to advance that agenda. It’s one reason that so many journalists have left legacy outlets to build independent platforms on sites like Substack.
This tabloid exists to sell hair spray—and anything else that brings in revenue. It is a for-profit enterprise, and its readership grows with controversy. Whether covering the salacious P. Diddy trial or exploiting the murder of George Floyd, outrage sells.
Dana Kennedy, the reporter behind the May 16 article quoting our police chief, appeared uninterested in the damage her story might cause. She came, poured an accelerant on the fire, and left. Her objective was to generate clicks and advertising revenue—and by that measure, she succeeded. The consequences for Minneapolis were irrelevant.
Our city continues working towards a safer and more equitable future. But stories like Kennedy’s stand in the way of that progress.
Media Coach
It’s unclear what Police Chief Brian O’Hara hoped to achieve by agreeing to an interview with the New York Post. We haven’t interviewed him yet—but if and when we do, we’ll ask.
Given that he’s from Newark, NJ, he must be familiar with the Post’s reputation. His spokesperson, Sgt. Garrett Parten, would have been wise to shut the door on the outlet with a short, uneventful statement: the department is working on the consent decree and focused on providing a safe environment in the city. Our goal is to create conditions where people feel safe leaving their homes, starting businesses, and welcoming guests.
That should be the message—full stop. That’s it. Say it, then move on.
It would have been a dull quote, and it might not have even made it into the story. But that’s the point. When dealing with a tabloid known for sensationalism, the smartest strategy is to be boring. Unless you’re trying to invite controversy, dullness is the best option.
Acknowledging the Obvious
Setting aside the question of whether there were more appropriate media outlets for the MPD to share its views, let’s take a closer look at Chief O’Hara’s actual statement:
“Here it’s very, very ideological and a lot of times it’s like reality and facts can’t get through the filter. It’s a very detached, bourgeois liberal mentality … It’s bizarre."
These remarks are understandably controversial, particularly in the context of a story published just before the five-year anniversary of George Floyd’s murder on May 25. But outside that framing, many residents would agree with the underlying sentiment. Minneapolis is home to a range of extreme ideologies, and some do seem disconnected from practical realities.
One example is the “Defund the Police” slogan and the subsequent campaign to replace the Minneapolis Police Department with a Department of Public Safety. Last year, the Civilian Police Accountability Commission (CPAC)—not to be confused with the national Conservative Political Action Conference—attempted to place a ballot initiative that would give citizens direct control over the police. Most would agree that this proposal sits on the ideological fringe. And yet, the group continues its efforts, currently seeking 20,000 signatures to move forward. It’s no surprise that the MPD—and its Chief—would be frustrated by this.
A second example is George Floyd Square. Five years later, the City Council has yet to finalize a plan, rejecting a flexible one that had the support of most directly affected residents. This decision appears driven by a small group who demand ideological conformity—by which they mean others must think and feel exactly as they do. Until they succeed in pulling others into their version of reality, they will continue to obstruct compromise and prolong the trauma the square symbolizes.
Conclusion
MPD Police Chief Brian O’Hara’s remarks about Minneapolis’s ideological climate were unnecessary—but not inaccurate.
Appointed on November 7, 2022, he has spent the last two and a half years navigating the city as both an observer and its top law enforcement official. His mistake was not in the substance of his comments, but in choosing the wrong time—and the wrong platform—to express them.
Still, it’s fair to acknowledge the source of his frustration. Minneapolis is mired in recurring ideological stand-offs that affect all residents, often to protect the positions of a few. Some groups, and the council members they support, seem more focused on preserving a status quo of anger and division rather than on advancing workable solutions.
As a city, we don’t have to indulge in the spectacle. We can recognize this controversy for what it is: a manufactured distraction, driven by Rupert Murdoch and a media empire built on outrage—and hair spray.
Subscriber Note: We’re planning to host a Happy Hour for paid subscribers on Thursday, May 29, from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. It’s intended as a social occasion, though we may invite a speaker. Location details to follow.
“MPD Police Chief Brian O’Hara’s remarks about Minneapolis’s ideological climate were unnecessary—but not inaccurate.”
I would argue his remarks were necessary. Several city council members in particular seem to be living in an ideological bubble. We’ve tried—and failed—to break that bubble with kid gloves.
I am with Chief O'Hara. He has demonstrated the utmost level of restraint in his comments these last 2.5 years, particularly given what our employees working in public safety have had to tolerate, and every crime victim has had to endure, many times, over and over. Chief O'Hara is NOT the problem here. This is exactly what this next election in Mpls is about; people taking NOTICE of this extreme situation in Mpls, and deciding to do something about it, finally.