[IMC-US] personal reprtback for indy folks abouttheNationalCOnference on Med

[sheri at speakeasy.org]

a nice piece on the topic

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=4&ItemID=7950

ps - any one have an idea how we can now "fork" the thread here so that the more everyday work of imc-us can continue on this list and this focussed but really good and important conversation can be broken off?  i just think of all those tools of social software that people/sites/orgs/groups are using and we're still in email world.  


> -----Original Message-----
> From: deva [mailto:drdartist at riseup.net]
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 10:50 PM
> To: 'Working Group for IMC-US.'
> Subject: Re: [IMC-US] personal reprtback for indy folks	abouttheNationalCOnference on Med
> 
> 
> On May 25, 2005, at 10:12 AM, Kat Aaron wrote:
> 
> > Argh, I can get so worked up about this.  Sorry, I didn't really mean
> > to rant, and I don't think that deva is coming from a super different
> > place than I am.  It's just important to me that if possible we keep
> > the conversations from the NCMR going about the
> > justice/democracy/reform issues, and think broadly about the openness
> > of IMC.  I hope that the conversation doesn't get subsumed under a
> > corporate-media-is-bullshit blanket.  Let's take that as a given and
> > work from there.
> 
> Both conversations need to happen. It is not a given that corporate 
> media is bullshit. Many many people, including radicals, still give it 
> more than it deserves. So many people still consume it daily, which 
> feeds it.
> 
> Corporate media is arguably the single most destructive force in this 
> country.
> 
> All too often when making such statements, I hear replies like, hey, we 
> also have a long way to go, and so on.
> 
> Corporate media is doing immeasurable harm in the world. Indymedia is a 
> value. Of course it has problems, could be better, and so on, but 
> fundamentally, they are nothing alike. There is no need to be 
> apologetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On May 25, 2005, at 10:12 AM, Kat Aaron wrote:
> 
> > If media activists
> > and media makers inside and outside IMC are going to push for reform,
> > or for a total takeback of the airwaves (my personal preference!), the
> > question to me is then what?
> 
> the task is simply to insure that nobody else grabs all the resources. 
> Diversity naturally follows and I consider it a question somewhat born 
> out of the dominant white culture's urge to know and control and shape 
> everything.
> 
> 
> 
> >   This new media, whether
> > it be IMC or something else, is only going to be as good as the
> > community ties behind it.  If we're making a new media, I don't want
> > to make a more left or more radical version of what we took down.  I
> > don't want a new media that's horizontally organized but still
> > under-represents people of color, women, immigrants, queers, etc.
> 
> people of color, immigrants, women, queers etc are currently actively 
> excluded. If new media is truly horizontal, then it will take care of 
> itself. It is taking care of itself wherever it has some room to grow 
> as on the internet. People of color do not need white folks helping 
> them, they just need white folks to stop erecting and actively 
> maintaining barriers which force power discrepancies.
> 
> I like the quote from Malcolm X... "Beware the newspapers, for they 
> will have you hating the oppressed, and loving the people doing the 
> oppressing" He understood that what we are calling the corporate media 
> is actively engaged in oppression, actively engaged in controlling and 
> shaping peoples minds.
> 
> 
> >   What sort of a media will replace the
> > corporate media, and who will be making it?
> 
> 
> This question supposes that there is some similarity. That something 
> that is happening now needs to be replaced. It does not. Corporate 
> media is a highly sophisticated propaganda apparatus. Providing tools 
> for people to communicate with each other is something so entirely 
> different from corporate media that you cannot talk about one replacing 
> the other.
> 
> You do not try to improve or reform something fundamentally inhumane. 
> You do not talk about improving or reforming a concentration camp. You 
> do not need to talk about replacing it because it serves only an evil 
> purpose. You just shut it down. That there is much talk about media 
> reform, shows that its nature is not yet understood...
> 
> I believe that a clear understanding and critique of corporate media is 
> helpful, if not necessary for the discussion you want to keep going...
> 
> thanks for responding
> regards,
> deva
> 
> 
> > I
> > know I'm not alone in that, even just based off the discussions in
> > this thread.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-US mailing list
> IMC-US at lists.ucimc.org
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-us
>