Newsletter #135
RSS
Thursday, February 22, 2007 1:43 PM
PayPal
You don’t need a Paypal Account to support InI
Ties that bind
by William Bowles • Thursday, 22 February, 2007
If nothing else, groups like Medialens perform an invaluable service to an otherwise woefully misinformed public pointing out the blatant and not-so-blatant bias in the corporate and state-run media’s coverage of events. Back in the mid-eighties I was involved in Extra!, a publication of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a New York-based media analysis outfit which like Medialens also performs an invaluable service in unpacking the inbuilt bias in media coverage of important events.
The question arises however, whether getting the public to write to outfits like the BBC has much effect on their news coverage and analysis? Judging by the events of the past few years, it’s doubtful whether it has had any effect whatsoever, aside from the odd and essentially meaningless retraction, which in any case disappears into the bit bucket, with every acknowledgement of an ‘error’ so hedged in provisos as to undermine any gain achieved.
This is not to say that we should not continue to target the BBC and the rest of the mainstream media, in analysing how the media operates and in whose interests it operates and who it represents.
And indeed, on occasion, for example the furore raised over the use of the ‘statistics’ produced by Iraq Body Count by the BBC revealed that absolutely nothing has changed, with the BBC mounting a vicious red-baiting witch-hunt against Medialens for exposing the spurious nature of the claims made by the IBC and how in turn, they were used to reinforce the prevailing justification for the invasion and occupation.
And we need look no further than the current propaganda campaign being waged by the BBC over the un-substantiated claims that Iran is behind the attacks on the occupation forces in Iraq, claims which have been refuted by the facts but search in vain for an acknowledgement of this in the news coverage except for the odd mention that is all but invisible when measured against the bulk of the coverage.
So important is the media to the maintenance of the status quo, that no amount of bitching and whining will make any fundamental change, this is a fact that has to be acknowledged for fear of over-estimating our impact or the importance of challenging their hegemonic control over the manufacture of news.
FAIR’s stated aim, at least when I was involved in it was to target media professionals in an effort to get them to recognise the role they played, for without their active or passive cooperation in the process, it would be virtually impossible for the MSM to operate as it does.
Easier said than done, journalists perform a vital role in the maintenance of the ruling order and for which the key players, editors, sub-editors and leading writers get rewarded handsomely and not only in material terms for their participation.
By elevating the journalist to the level of a de facto ‘celebrity’ and over-inflating the importance of the ‘news’, for example 24-hour ‘news’ channels that say the same thing over and over again, our understanding of the world is reduced to nothing more than a series of one-dimensional clichés.
It should be apparent that the problem is far more complex and deep-seated than merely exposing the lies and disinformation peddled by the dominant media. The root causes lie in the ‘education’ system that produces the ideological raison-d’etre and in an economic system which binds the ‘professional’ journalist tighter than any chains can to the system.
Thus any analysis of the role of the mainstream media has to be set in the context of a wider and deeper analysis of capitalism, for although the sophistication and extent of the media’s role in maintaining the status quo is unquestionably a burning issue, it’s not a new phenomenon, it extends back as far as the existence of the printed word can be traced, some five hundred years.
The emergence of Web-based independent media, an event whose effect has, in my opinion, been over-estimated, is obviously still welcome but unless it becomes an integral component of an analysis of how capitalism maintains its control and most important, part of a viable alternative to the prevailing order, we will continue to remain marginalised and fragmented.
This is not say that the MSM is not aware our potential to put a cat amongst the pidgeons, just look at how the corporate media was finally forced to recognise the power of the ‘Blog’ and once recognised how it sought to produce a ‘citizen-based’ journalism, but observe how it has been coopted and in fact absorbed into the plethora of mainstream media outlets.
Virtually every major ‘news’ channel now has its ‘have your say’ outlet but each and every one is ‘moderated’ by the parent, that is to say, controlled by a central editorial department and in any case, it is once more, a drop in the ocean by comparison. What it does do and most effectively, is create the illusion of ‘citizen participation’.
There is no way we can compete, head-on with the likes of hegemonic structures like the BBC or corporate news organisations like Murdoch’s News Corp, and there is no way on earth that they are going to change in spite of all our efforts, it’s simply not in the nature of the beast. Therefore I contend that the best route is to call for a boycott of the mainstream media. Stop watching the BBC news or buying newspapers, for the one thing the Web has created is a wealth of independent news coverage and analysis, sources that are increasingly sophisticated and reliable whilst offering a wide range of interpretations of events without compromising fundamental principles of honesty and integrity.
Underpinning this approach is the importance of critical thinking which relies on being fully informed about events. Without the ability to think critically about events, we remain passive consumers, unable to assess events and their causes. Thus the emergence of an independent, web-based media should in theory at least, aim to encourage and develop critical thinking. Ranting at the enemy is all well and good but in order to have confidence in our ability to develop an alternative depends entirely on having a real understanding of what’s going on in the world and why.
Accueil 
