the biggest problem of the Peace Movement

Are there affinity groups forming to visit the media, such as KRON, KPIX, KQED and the Cronicle?

Let me know. This is the next phase in the struggle. I was surprised that ANSWER and others walked right by the Comical on Saturday and no one except for 3 sharp young women stopped to protest there.

I agree. Would you like to talk, off-line, about how to set this in motion?

Every time I see your people in the street blocking my way I am filled with hate. You think that you are hurting "big business," but you are really hurting the mom & pop stores. Idealistic people like yourselves are just too ignorant of the world to understand what you are doing and who you are hurting.

Every time I see your people in the street blocking my way I am filled with hate. You think that you are hurting "big business," but you are really hurting the mom & pop stores. Idealistic people like yourselves are just too ignorant of the world to understand what you are doing and who you are hurting.

Every time I see your people in the street blocking my way I am filled with hate. You think that you are hurting "big business," but you are really hurting the mom & pop stores. Idealistic people like yourselves are just too ignorant of the world to understand what you are doing and who you are hurting.

The overwhelmingly pro-war bias of the "mainstream" media is no surprise to those who have been following events in Venezuela.

While they pretend to be "above it all", "objective", and "willing to air both sides", in fact, the "mainstream" media is not only biased in favor of whatever elite happens to be in power at the time, they are PART of that elite.

Just as the media elite beat the drums for a military coup against the democratically-elected government of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela...so the media in America beat the war drums 24/7!

They should not be allowed to GET AWAY WITH THAT!

some people are realizing that the street manifestations and sit ins are not very useful to stop war – mostly because the mass media doesn’t give it properly coverage.

(and sometimes a newspaper article or radio interview is more strong - to change public opinion mind - than thousands of people in the street).

what happens is that we live in a globalised world that has its images and messages almost all mediated by the media industry. and we are still using strategies (that were very strong sometime ago) but now, if we make street demonstrations and media doesn’t show it, the effects are important but limited:

this is serious, because even if we publish our own web sites and use free radios and magazines, probably the people who will access these independent media are the people who already shares this opinion.

and it is crucial to get “non-alternative” normal people to hear our voices and see “other words” rather them official conservative mass media pro-war opinion.


so, finally…

the idea to be proposed is an intent to have the best use of the creative and courageous will to realize direct actions and civil disobedience,

and was inspired in the brazilian land-less peoples movement (MST)
these people, who doesn’t have land to grow their own food, and believing that land is a public resource, they plan and execute big-farm occupies. with this, they fight for their rights and also get a good public attention and exposition on local, national and international media (and this way, putting the land distribution on discussion).

and… if we can see and realize the airwaves also as public resource…

and the fact that this resource is being monopolized by some few companies (which doesn’t give it a good use, because they don’t allow really free speech space or large participation and discussion),

so, the proposal is that people organize to peacefully occupy the commercial tv studios (and also radios).

it could be planned many ways to get in, move to the live studios, make sit ins inside it, present a letter of manifesto, demanding the civil society more space and even control of the media vehicles, and demanding specific dates and times to make free-from-censorship-and-control programs and interviews.

or even demanding that some alternative documentary and interview previously recorded are played on live.

…


this was just an initial idea, which I think deserves more thoughts and discussions to be improved.

but I really believe it could have some good results,
“waking up” many many people all around.


very best wishes,

marcos menezes
marcos [at] rbc.org.br

So you guys want mainstream media to put you views in the paper so we can ready what you’re about. We all ready know, you’re anti everything that is American and want to turn the USA into United Socialist American.

Follow the method of the people in Venezouela,where they
protested and occupied the mass media stations to
obligate them to publice the support of the to Chavez.

I agree -- the lies, distortions and non-coverage in the media are the number one problem of the anti-war movement. If there was objective coverage of both sides of the issues, the American people at large would be up in arms. As it is, they're ignorant and blindfolded, still believing in the fairy-tale of a truthful independent media that tells them everything they need to know. Looking at foreign newspapers, even from co-invader Britain, will show you just how badly manipulated the U.S. news has become. I think protests at media offices are an excellent idea.

Here's a great anti-corporate-news poster to use:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/03/1589312.php

"redstar" wrote:
> in fact, the "mainstream" media is not only biased in favor of
> whatever elite happens to be in power at the time, they are PART
> of that elite. Just as the media elite beat the drums for a military
> coup against the democratically-elected government of Hugo
> Chavez in Venezuela.

huh? He's the president, has seized power and shot the opposition, and he is not "the elite"? What, is accepting military advisors from Fidel a sort of "Get Out Of Elitism Free" card or something?

> They should not be allowed to GET AWAY WITH THAT!

You're proposing a sort of rulership atop vote-driven and constitutionally-limited rulership, then? Me, I want to try to minimize all rulership myself. Do you really want it bigger and more controlling? What happens when the messed-up people try to seize that big center of power then? You know they will.

"Power to the People" doesn't have to mean they're sittin' behind a desk all day.... ;-)


For the thread title, I think the biggest problem is its emotionalism and lack of sound thinking. The emotions are used by those addicted to power to create a short-term surge in participants, but you'd really be better off in the long run by thinking things through, finding areas of *commonality* with others, and working towards the advantage of each person involved. Demonizing those who disagree just isn't sustainable. Cut out all the anti-Bush childishness and focus on fair principles, that will take you farther, that's my opinion since you asked, thankyou verymuch.

I agree generally with your sentiments. It is the mind of the public that generates support or opposition to war and other toxic policies. This mind has in large part, been shaped by the dominant media. Therefore it is the dominant media that is the enemy of truth and goodness in the world. We can change this most effectively by working "for" the kind of media we want to see. We need to become media activists, just as much, and with even more energy than that which we bring to the peace movement. All action starts with thought and perception. This is where we must focus the brunt of our energies...because this is where it starts.

Edward Herman (of Manufacturing Consent, et al) agrees. In an article by Lydia Sargent (2002) in this month's Z-magazine, Herman discusses his vision for "pressing the press":

"So it is time to direct more of our protests toward the media. What's needed now is a long-term campaign to 'Press the Press.' Not we can get 1 of our 'experts,' buried among 10 of their 'experts' to explain U.S. motives in 20 seconds on 8:00 AM Sunday morning TV and/or radio show.
"What we want is for mainstream media to include peace and justice programming, prepared by the peace and justice movement, in their daily reports. If they do not agree to this demand, we picket their offices, occupy them if necessary and shut them down. What on earth is the justification for their continued existence? There is no moral, ethical, or humanitarian reason for them to continue giving us casualty estimates (from 500 to 1,000,000), as if they were discussing the weather; or for them to debate calmly whether to assassinate the head of a sovereign country, and then to take a poll on it, for Christ sakes; or for them to act as if peace and justice are weird, idiosyncratic concepts that they can't quite grasp. (And by the way, for ease of local organizing, mainstream media outlets are everywhere, in every city, every town, every campus, every locale).
"... [Speaking of a brief campaign launched during the 1st Gulf War] we submitted thousands of signed declarations and the sample videos to the local public radio and TV station, using them to lobby for programming. We also organized a one-day conference to gather more material and spread the truth. After a period of time, if we didn't get any response, we were prepared to picket the target media. If this had no affect, we were going to escalate to civil disobedience, followed by occupations. But the U.S. military had annihilated Iraq by the time we got past the first step and we were not able to continue the campaign.
"It is time to start a new campaign to Press the Press, this time nationally and internationally, in addition to our continuing to create and distribute our own media. It should be a long-term, strategic effort aimed at changing existing repressive media institutions, just as we struggle to change repressive financial institutions and governments. This Press the Press campaign should also go after mainstream media distribution companies. The latter ensure that our peace and justice views are not visible in stores or on newsstands, TV, and radio. This campaign cannot wait. After the 1991 'Gulf War,' TV Guide revealed that much of the TV war coverage was produced by a public relations company, who sold the war to the American people. When that news came out, why didn't we set out to occupy or shut down every single mainstream media institution in the U.S.? Because we didn't respond then, they continue to do it now, selling war as an exciting TV drama ('Showdown with Saddam'), selling fear, selling U.S. imperialism as our patriotic duty, even promoting it as a victory for feminism (complete with military fashion statements) because 'with war looming, they [women] are closer to combat than ever' (NYT Sunday Mag., 2/16/2003). Let's begin a campaign to Press the Press, because the news should keep us informed, not in line" (Z-magazine, March 2003, pps. 5-6).

Anyone who has been in SF demonstrating and compared their experience with the way it is portrayed in the mainstream news media knows that this is as important as anything we are doing. If we do not act to force the media to allow the peace movement a voice, the public will continue to be misinformed and saturated with propaganda. Peace.

Edward Herman (of Manufacturing Consent, et al) agrees. In an article by Lydia Sargent (2002) in this month's Z-magazine, Herman discusses his vision for "pressing the press":

"So it is time to direct more of our protests toward the media. What's needed now is a long-term campaign to 'Press the Press.' Not we can get 1 of our 'experts,' buried among 10 of their 'experts' to explain U.S. motives in 20 seconds on 8:00 AM Sunday morning TV and/or radio show.
"What we want is for mainstream media to include peace and justice programming, prepared by the peace and justice movement, in their daily reports. If they do not agree to this demand, we picket their offices, occupy them if necessary and shut them down. What on earth is the justification for their continued existence? There is no moral, ethical, or humanitarian reason for them to continue giving us casualty estimates (from 500 to 1,000,000), as if they were discussing the weather; or for them to debate calmly whether to assassinate the head of a sovereign country, and then to take a poll on it, for Christ sakes; or for them to act as if peace and justice are weird, idiosyncratic concepts that they can't quite grasp. (And by the way, for ease of local organizing, mainstream media outlets are everywhere, in every city, every town, every campus, every locale).
"... [Speaking of a brief campaign launched during the 1st Gulf War] we submitted thousands of signed declarations and the sample videos to the local public radio and TV station, using them to lobby for programming. We also organized a one-day conference to gather more material and spread the truth. After a period of time, if we didn't get any response, we were prepared to picket the target media. If this had no affect, we were going to escalate to civil disobedience, followed by occupations. But the U.S. military had annihilated Iraq by the time we got past the first step and we were not able to continue the campaign.
"It is time to start a new campaign to Press the Press, this time nationally and internationally, in addition to our continuing to create and distribute our own media. It should be a long-term, strategic effort aimed at changing existing repressive media institutions, just as we struggle to change repressive financial institutions and governments. This Press the Press campaign should also go after mainstream media distribution companies. The latter ensure that our peace and justice views are not visible in stores or on newsstands, TV, and radio. This campaign cannot wait. After the 1991 'Gulf War,' TV Guide revealed that much of the TV war coverage was produced by a public relations company, who sold the war to the American people. When that news came out, why didn't we set out to occupy or shut down every single mainstream media institution in the U.S.? Because we didn't respond then, they continue to do it now, selling war as an exciting TV drama ('Showdown with Saddam'), selling fear, selling U.S. imperialism as our patriotic duty, even promoting it as a victory for feminism (complete with military fashion statements) because 'with war looming, they [women] are closer to combat than ever' (NYT Sunday Mag., 2/16/2003). Let's begin a campaign to Press the Press, because the news should keep us informed, not in line" (Z-magazine, March 2003, pps. 5-6).

Anyone who has been in SF demonstrating and compared their experience with the way it is portrayed in the mainstream news media knows that this is as important as anything we are doing. If we do not act to force the media to allow the peace movement a voice, the public will continue to be misinformed and saturated with propaganda. Peace.

what about battery street--between nbc and cbs? two birds... with one... sit in.

what about battery street--between nbc and cbs? two birds... with one... sit in.

The real problem is anti-war protesters don't appear to be very well educated or eloquent, and seem to believe anything they're told. Personally, I wouldn't trust ANSWER or any organisation that has ties to authoritarianism, just like I don't trust Bush, or anyone else for that matter. Vigilence is key. I see the movement as already breaking up because of internal dissent. To any freepers who are reading this, I appreciate your at least visiting this site to see what the "other side" is saying. I have been trying to expose myself to all the facts and opinions so that I can make informed decisions, and I encourage you all to look before you leap.

That being said, we need to start building a coalition in this country, and we need to rebuild bridges that have been burnt between the so-called liberals and conservatives. I think alienating each other is counterproductive. We need to find out what we agree on, and talk about what we don't so we can find something in between that works well enough for everyone. For example, protecting our Constitutional rights is a fight we can win together. We can also find a way to preserve the Earth's resources and biodiversity together. This is going to take a lot of serious fact finding, debate, and compromise, but it is absolutely essential to having a future we are going to want to live in.

"The real problem is anti-war protesters don't appear to be very well educated or eloquent, and seem to believe anything they're told. Personally, I wouldn't trust ANSWER or any organisation that has ties to authoritarianism, just like I don't trust Bush, or anyone else for that matter. Vigilence is key... I have been trying to expose myself to all the facts and opinions so that I can make informed decisions, and I encourage you all to look before you leap. "

Right on, thanks, I'm glad you're out there.

"We need to find out what we agree on, and talk about what we don't so we can find something in between that works well enough for everyone."

I haven't seen anyone here in America who doesn't want things better for other people. Where we seem to get stuck is in charging others with Hussein-like lack of compassion, and then acting against them on this false belief. Keeping a tight focus on shared beliefs seems key to working together for a better world.

It's good practice to read things we may not initially agree with.