Blog PostsMost the so-called ‘alternative media' are just outlets for ‘acceptable' opinion, and ‘acceptable' discourse of the state and corporate sponsored left (I believe the same occurs on the right as well). Anything outside the lines is nothing other than sheer blasphemy. Blasphemy against the church, state, and party (of ‘progressivism', or at least what has co-opted its name). On many of the faux progressive or ‘alternative media' websites, the blasphemers are locked away (with lock and key), while at others they are just relegated to the sidelines (or if we want to be metaphorical about it, the proverbial dungeon). Thus, the herd is kept in line, and the homogeneity of the ostensible left, prevails! Yay! The good guys won another battle! But, of course, the outcome was determined before the clock had even started to tick.
If ‘the left' or ‘the progressives' or whoever opposes the agenda of the corporatists, wants to have even the slightest bit of hope (or a chance) to win, we need to be honest and open and front and center about this! Some in the ‘alternative' media or the online left or whatever you'd call it are working for peace and justice, and others are working to advance the corporatist agenda (I'm sorry but anyone supporting the Democratic Party at this point is engaging in this practice, even if one has the right intentions at heart). I don't know if the solution is boycotts or strong arm tactics, against the cyber-appendages of the vulgar Democrats, but for anyone who wasn't aware of this, I'm here to tell you that's precisely how it is. The strong arm tactics are all coming from ‘official' progressivism currently, and the ones playing defense (and/or catch-up) are those who are to their left.
A handful of people who have the requisite name recognition are allowed to publish on all of the party's organs, but any budding future versions of them are given the back of the hand. It seems that the sickness of celebrity in this country extends far beyond the realm of show business; and since most of our communities in this country no longer have any center of meeting or public square, where the ideas of the day can be hashed out (or agreed or disagreed upon freely), then it seems that the ‘information superhighway', is supposed to substitute for our absence of a political or social (central) space. However, of course, the first amendment does not seem to apply to our present medium; therefore the guts are stripped out of the discussion, if ‘incendiary' or ‘provocative' topics are expelled from the debate!
In the ‘alternative' media there is no longer any serious application of the statement, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Rather the ‘doctrine' of the vast swath of the aforementioned media (summed up in as few words as possible) seems to be, "Disapprove of what I say, and you will be put to death!" The Obamabots win every time when this ‘doctrine' proves to be the standard; and free and open discussion in a democratic society, loses every time as well. Moreover, the Soviet-esque U.S. political system marches on, and the special interests and the corporatocracy rule time and time again!
Re: Thoughtherding and the 'Alternative Media'
By Petersen, Robert at Jan 13, 2010 10:39 AM
Sean, I certainly understand where you’re coming from here, but I’ll go one step further and ask you what your take is on a possible solution. Of course main stream media is corporate owned, we all understand that, which is specifically why we depend on alt media, such as ZNet. Corporate media sells stuff, which is how they receive revenue, and will not allow any opinion to jeopardize that revenue stream. It’s incredibly undemocratic, and there lies the problem. Is there a solution?
Reply this comment
Re:
By Fenley, Sean at Jan 13, 2010 19:36 PM
Robert,
I wrote a long comment in reply and it was not posted (not sure what happened)! Aaarrggghhh. Here's the short version:
1) Did you see the interview with Chomsky that Z just published? He mentioned that the number 2 newspaper in Mexico does not have any advertising. Not because they don't accept it, but because business will not take it out in the paper (La Jornada). I wonder what their business model is? I'd be interested to find out.
2) I'm pretty sure the most of the Venezuelan media was antagnoistic to Chavez when he was first elected. I'm not sure what media was reasonable enough toward him that Venezuelans could get some better information, and get to point where they could understand he wasn't the devil and actually vote for him. There's probably something to learn there, and I'd imagine the situation is not that much different in the other Latin American countries where leftists have been elected.
3) Ultimately my hope is with the internet, that the internet will put a lot of the mainstream media out of business, and folks will be able to distinguish more of the truth from the lies. Although you'd think more of something like that would be noticeable by now, so may I'm just engaging in some wishful thinking with that.
Those were my main points, maybe I'll add more, I think the disappeared comment was better, lol...
Reply this comment
Re:
By Fenley, Sean at Jan 14, 2010 09:03 AM
Of course, my main point is about alternative media and how there are essentially two alternative medias, one tethered to the Democrats one looking to build something else. I'm not sure what I was looking to do by bringing that out (to tell you the truth). To my surprise there has not been a lot of talk about this, maybe what I wrote can start a conversation...
The example of countries like Venezuela that have largely a right-wing media but are able to elect progressive (even left-wing leaders), are probably a good model for us. I hope to learn more about the strategies that folks have employed in countries where the media is tightly controlled, but people have built alternative outlets to challenge the establishment. Right now the small voices and outlets in this country don't seem to be making major inroads, into the information that majority of Americans consume. This is, of course, our problem, one I don't not have the answer to, but of course we'll all continue looking for the answer(s).
Reply this comment
Re: Thoughtherding and the 'Alternative Media'
By Albert, Michael at Jan 11, 2010 09:18 AM
Hi,
I really am not sure what you are referring to in this blog - typically, talking about progresive outlets, would mean you have in mind places like, say, ITT, the Progressive, the Nation, etc. in print, and various others online, as well, and perhaps even Monthly Review, Z, and the more explicitly anti capitalist operations.
But I don't think any of these are subject to your criticism - as least as aggressively as you offer it - so I am left wondering what you are referring to...
Reply this comment
By ., Khin at Jan 10, 2010 20:53 PM
Daily Kos is faux progressive. Open Left is faux progressive.
Corrente is actual progressive. So is ZBlogs.
(Too bad no one replies to posts here.)
Reply this comment
Re:
By Fenley, Sean at Jan 11, 2010 08:44 AM
Hey thanks for the comment. Oh yeah, Z, I've been reading Z since I think before the internet, lol. Corrente? I don't know that, I'll have to check it out.
Reply this comment