When Corporate Media Cover 'Independent Media'
April 20, 2000
During the recent protests in Washington against the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, the leading cable news network became fascinated with "independent media." Journalism free of huge economic interests -- what a concept!
"Modern-day demonstrators say you just can't trust folks like us, the so-called corporate media," a CNN anchor explained, introducing a report that aired repeatedly over a two-day period. Correspondent Brooks Jackson took it from there. "They call themselves the independent media," he said, and that means working without ties to the large corporations of the media world.
"Global corporate media? Gee, that would be us," Jackson deadpanned, "CNN, owned by Time Warner, soon to be merged with America Online. They don't like us very much. They want to tell their story their way."
Naturally, CNN proceeded to tell their story CNN's way. The report allowed the "independent journalists" just a few tightly snipped words in edgewise. But at least one incisive remark made it through the network's editing gauntlet: "We believe that objectivity is, in fact, a myth -- that everyone has a bias, everyone has an agenda -- and that corporations like major news corporations have a corporate bias."
Well, getting even a few seconds to make that point on CNN amounted to a bit of a breakthrough, although the correspondent's narration was intent on maintaining a bemused tone. Meanwhile, as usual, self-satire on CNN's part
appeared to be inadvertent.
Midway through the report, one of the independent journalists complained that on television, "Usually the corporate folks get the last word." Sure enough, a minute later CNN's Jackson got the last word, reading the end of the script as he noted "some unintended irony -- a protest against globalism covering itself on the World Wide Web."
It was the kind of quip that goes over big in network studios, a smirky tag line with insight more apparent than real. In this case, the correspondent provided an easy cliche -- obscuring the vast distinction between international solidarity and corporate globalization.
Gathering in the nation's capital to take action on behalf of human rights, economic justice, labor rights and environmental protection, thousands of protesters understood from the outset that mainstream news was unlikely to illuminate the key issues. Efforts by independent journalists have made alternative coverage available at www.indymedia.org and other websites.
These days, news stories about "independent media" often emphasize the use of digital technology. But the most important successes are human rather than technical. No matter how modern the streaming audio and video, it
wouldn't matter much if people across the country and around the planet weren't eager to find out what anti-corporate demonstrators are doing and why they're doing it.
Within the appreciable constraints of corporate journalism, the mass media's coverage of the protests against the IMF and World Bank included some valuable reporting. For instance, Time magazine's April 24 edition had a short trenchant piece headlined "The IMF: Dr. Death?" Such content exists in mainstream media today because -- for years and decades -- activists as well as small (and yes, independent) media persisted in challenging the power of corporate globalizers while large media outlets could hardly have seemed to care less.
Yes, corporate sensibilities usually get the last word. But not always. So, we conclude here with words from one of the great American journalists and media critics of the last century, George Seldes. For several decades, he struggled to boost journalistic independence as a crucial antidote to the convergence of big money and media power.
"Only in democratic countries," he wrote in the 1930s, "is there the beginning of a suspicion that the old axiom about the press being the bulwark of liberty is something that affects the daily life of the people -- that it is a living warning rather than an ancient wisecrack. A people that wants to be free must arm itself with a free press."
If cable television had been around then, top news editors at CNN would probably have considered Seldes to be an odd sort of fellow. He was an independent journalist who believed in eternal vigilance as a prerequisite for the free flow of information. "Never grow weary of protesting," he advised. "In this sensitive business of dealing with the public which depends on faith and good will, protest is a most effective weapon. Therefore protest."
Norman Solomon is a syndicated columnist. His latest book is The Habits of Highly Deceptive Media.
Email this article to a friend
"And now, the P.U.-litzer Prizes for 2000"
December 23, 2000
"Media crucial as Bush faces 'Legitimacy Gap'"
December 17, 2000
"How to improve on the feats of network news"
December 8, 2000
"A dire shortage of pre-inaugural schlock"
November 30, 2000
"Finally: A Huge Media Spectacle That Really Matters?"
November 23, 2000
"Public wiser than pundits in post-election uproar"
November 16, 2000
"Arrogance of TV Networks: Compounding a national crisis"
November 9, 2000
"New Democrats: Maybe the jig is up"
November 2, 2000
"Resistance to a tightening grip of censorship"
October 26, 2000
"The debates: Truth is stranger than science fiction"
October 19, 2000
"Media spin remains in sync with Israeli occupation"
October 13, 2000
"Our debts to new media technology"
October 6, 2000
"Level the playing field: What a media concept!"
September 29, 2000
"Dr. Laura gets a TV show-but at what cost?"
September 7, 2000
"When watchdogs have a blind spot - for themselves"
August 31, 2000
"Paying homage to the Two-Party Media System"
August 24, 2000
"The Deception Convention: Don't stop winking about tomorrow"
August 17, 2000
"Holy smoke and mirrors: the rise of centrist theocrats"
August 10, 2000
"The Pleasantville party floats on a media cloud"
August 2, 2000
"Convention hospitality and police brutality"
July 24, 2000
"The easy media politics of optimism"
July 19, 2000
"And now, an all-new episode of 'Media Jeopardy!'"
July 13, 2000
"Nader raises hackles of media establishment"
July 6, 2000
"George Orwell's unhappy birthday"
June 29, 2000
"The Los Alamos story: spinning like crazy"
June 22, 2000
"The case for corporate-given names"
June 15, 2000
"Can 'E-government' bring us point-and-click democracy?"
June 8, 2000
"Campaign forecast: A long hot summer of punditry"
June 1, 2000
"U.S. news media: A security zone for Israel"
May 25, 2000
"Virtual Commandments of the dot.com faith"
May 18, 2000
"Overcoming the hazards of media monoculture"
May 11, 2000
"Ad industry: Giving women special treatment "
May 3, 2000
"Break up Microsoft? . . . Then how about the media 'Big Six?'"
April 27, 2000
"When Corporate Media Cover 'Independent Media'"
April 20, 2000
"Protests in Washington clash with media spin"
April 13, 2000
"From the news media to Elian, with love"
April 6, 2000
"Mickey Mouse network participates in abuse"
March 30, 2000
"Broadcasters celebrate big gains from violence and greed"
March 26, 2000
"A season of news coverage: No cure for political blues"
March 25, 2000
"The power and limits of photojournalism"
March 23, 2000
"The media’s lethal injection of numbing"
March 16, 2000
"Self-censorship is shadowing the new media era"
March 3, 2000
"Reporting on bloodshed, TV journalists play dumb"
March 2, 2000
"Dr. Laura: Radio’s leading anti-gay zealot"
February 24, 2000
"NPR floats an ombudsman, but problems run deep"
February 17, 2000
"E-Vandalism intrudes on the power to be heard"
February 10, 2000
"Fine journalism deserves a lot more attention"
February 3, 2000
"Bill Bradley, news media and 'The Politics of Ambiguity'"
January 27, 2000
"Aol Time Warner: calling the faithful to their knees"
January 14, 2000
"What happened to the 'Information Superhighway'?"
January 7, 2000
Read Articles by Year:
2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000