Today’s ‘March Against Mainstream Media’ may be a well-kept secret
By JIM BROOKS
Nelson County Gazette
Friday, Nov. 15, 2013 — As a guy whose interests focus largely on the news media and news itself, I have watched with interest the run-up to an event that culminates today: the “March Against the Mainstream Media.”
The march is a loosely organized event that presumably spans the globe — or at least to countries with freedom of the press accompanied with the freedom to protest the press without being arrested, “re-educated” or shot.
The goal is to protest the corporate control of the mass media, which generally is considered to be the TV and cable TV news outlets. According to protest organizers, six corporations own 90 percent of all major media (there seems to be disagreement among organizers if the term “mainstream media” includes newspapers and radio).
The protest also hopes to raise the awareness of people who regularly watch or read the mainstream media of the “fear mongering, lies, and pointless stories the media runs in order to keep the American people at odds with a positive change.”
WINNING BY LOSING: A PARADOX. While I can appreciate protesting media coverage and objectivity, the methodology the protest employs creates a paradox of sorts. According to organizers, the appearance of protestors at the offices of mainstream media outlets will force the media to chose to cover the protests or simply ignore the protesters.
According to the march website, organizers actually want the media to ignore the protests.
“This is what we want them to do,” the website states, “because independent and alternative media organizations along with large social media pages with millions of reach have been put on high alert for this event and will then flood the internet and radio to the fact that this mass protest is going on against the mainstream media.”
The protest that the media won’t cover “will cause the mass public (who only watch MSM) to search for the story elsewhere, and turn away from the (MSM) television. While we have the attention of the public for this day, while they are looking into this giant event, we must get the point across to them that a lot of very serious things are taking place that they are unaware of or have been lied to. The MSM news channel that they always watch has deep ties with large contributors of money and government branches to only show the news that is beneficial to those who pay these MSM giants. Most importantly we must turn away from being spoon-fed information from the MSM and turn to alternative and independent media sources for our news.
We must make it clear on that day that the news source that is not showing the protests is the news source you have to stop getting your news from. And the news source that IS showing the protests is where you should look for news from now on.” (http://mamsm.info/about.htm)
DEFINING ‘ALTERNATIVE’ MEDIA. Again, I can’t disagree with all of the protesters’ complaints with the mainstream media. One aspect of the protest I have watched closely are the recommended “alternative media” sources the organizers suggest serve as alternative sources for news. In my review of some of these sites, I too often found the best of these “alternatives” left something to be desired.
A story published Nov. 13, 2013 in Digital Journal highlighted several alternative news sources, one of which was RT (otherwise known as Russia Today), the post Soviet-era government-funded news service created in 2005 primarily to give Russia’s perspective on world news and events.
Two additional alternative media sources recommended were Intellihub.com, a very nicely organized news site with news from around the world and LibertyBeat.com, another nice news site with plenty of content. These sites qualify as “alternative news sources” — or do they?
On closer inspection, you’ll find that the majority of the stories posted on each site are based in part on — you guessed it — the mainstream media, including Reuters, the Associated Press, CNN, and many others, including Russia Today (RT). While I give them credit for reporting the sources for their content, it erodes the argument that one can make about the independence of alternative news sites when they all depend to some degree on the mainstream media!
Most sites did a very good job of sourcing their news to the property TV, newspaper or website; several sites I visited earlier this month borrowed news items from all over the world with ZERO attribution!
Despite the paradoxical nature of the protest (“winning” by “losing” in regard to media coverage), the protest may indeed attract the attention — however so brief — of their target audience.
Some members of the protest have focused their efforts on awareness of their concerns regarding corporate control of the media and concerns of the influence of business and politicians on media coverage. In the end, public awareness should be the primary goal. Asking people to change their viewing habits overnight is a pipe dream; but give them something to mull over in their mind each time they watch TV news, and you might ignite a spark that will grow into a shared awareness.
-30-
