Is Indymedia still relevant?
Kevin Groves,
Issue date: 9/24/02 Section: Features
| |
| |
|
If you had watched the TV reports or read the newspapers, you would have seen what are now familiar images of protesters in black clothing destroying shopping centres. You might also have seen images of armor-clad police officers trying to keep protesters away from the building where world leaders sat to discuss trade.
What you might not have gotten from the news coverage of the WTO protests was the impression that protesters were largely uninterested in violence.
That's because media coverage of the events portrayed WTO protesters as "all purpose agitators" (US News & World Report), "terminally aggrieved," (Philadelphia Inquirer), simply "against world trade," (ABC News) and making "much ado about nothing" (CNN) but the basis of protester concern went virtually unexplored.
But Seattle was also the birthplace of Indymedia, which used the Internet to broadcast images of WTO protesters being beaten, gassed, pepper-sprayed and arrested. Its activists provided alternative coverage so well that some have claimed Indymedia will be essential for the achievement of major democratic, social and political successes.
Now fast forward to 2002, where more than 80 Indymedia sites have sprung up all over the world. How has Indymedia grown since its baptism by fire at the Battle of Seattle? Is Indymedia still independent, or have the years polarized it into a mouthpiece for left-wing interests?
To answer these questions, Canadian University Press interviewed three media commentators with very different perspectives on how far Indymedia has come and how far it still needs to go.
Indymedia continued on Page 14
Scott Nelson was at the WTO protests and has been with Vancouver Indymedia since its inception in 2000. He is friendly and, as he answers my questions, he speaks in an intelligent, articulate voice that seems continually set on high-speed, making me glad I'm taping the conversation as well as taking notes.
He's also quick to sell the good points of what he calls the Indymedia brand: the global participation, the impeccable democracy, it's all part of the Indymedia sales pitch.
For starters, Nelson says, any Indymedia site operates on what he calls "the open publishing model."
"It's based on the idea that anybody can be their own journalist," Nelson says. "Anyone can post their content and boom it's the next item on Indymedia's newswire."
And people do post. Looking on the newswire of the Vancouver Indymedia web site, which snakes down the right side of the homepage, a heated debate currently rages from individuals on either side of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. One even claims that New Democrat MP Svend Robinson's attempt earlier this year to walk towards the West Bank was "an enormous statement and should put all the pathetic do-nothing politicos in Ottawa to shame."
In fact, Nelson claims Indymedia has no censor ready to spike a submission because of its political content. Instead, Nelson says all submissions are published by default and the only exception is if an Indymedia's editorial collective, composed of those diehards who come to an Indymedia's twice-monthly meetings, believe the piece is hateful or an advertisement.
"Oh, and we don't do porn either." Nelson says, laughing. "There's plenty of places already on the Internet to get that."
As far as Vancouver Indymedia's political bias goes, Nelson freely admits he's a card-carrying member of the BC Green Party and plans to run in the next Vancouver civic election under the Green banner. He also admits that contributors who come to Vancouver Indymedia's meetings represent what he calls the "three colours."
"They're your Greens, your blacks [anarchists] and your reds [socialists]," Nelson says. "We definitely tend to attract the progressive lefty crowd, there's no doubt about it."
Still, when I ask Nelson if all Indymedia sites are fairly left-wing in practice — despite the egalitarian theory he laid out — he pauses for a second to think before answering. Soon, I hear him take in a deep breath signaling a story is about to come out.
It turns out to be a yarn about an incident that happened last month in Portand, Oregon. It started when George W. Bush visited Portland after announcing a new forestry initiative designed to curb forest fires by relaxing U.S. logging laws. Naturally, Nelson says, a lot of people were annoyed that Bush was in town and decided to stage a protest.
"And, of course, the cops — as usual — got way out of hand, pepper-sprayed like babies, and shot protesters with rubber bullets, so it was very exciting. It was an Indymedia moment," said Nelson.
And to make sure the incident could be viewed around the world, some of the Portland activists put together a quick video and posted it on the local Indymedia site the next morning with news of the footage spreading quickly. The video started a debate on San Francisco Indymedia, complete with posts allegedly from those with right-wing political views. Nelson recalls one writer in particular, who used the pen name "smash the left," caused an uproar on the San Francisco site by accusing the Indymedia site of propagating hatred and even terrorism.
"He was quite a potty-mouth-little-righteous-gun-toting-voice-of-the-right," Nelson said holding this contributor's presence up as a key example that the right does have a voice on Indymedia, even if he personally wishes they weren't there.
"Posts from the right are a fact of life on Indymedia and they tend to come in fits and starts, but that's true of pretty much anything on Indymedia. There are even times when you could say the left aren't posting much," Nelson says.
As I finish the interview, I thank Nelson for his time, but he's not done yet and remembers something else he wants to add. He says that, because Indymedia embodies the anti-globalisation movement, no one set of beliefs can dominate.
"You may look at one Indymedia site and say 'my god, these are nothing but bomb-throwing Anarchists,' or look at another one and think they're nothing but a bunch of squatter kids in Amsterdam, there's no way to tell." Nelson says. "As far as some of us are concerned, Indymedia is democracy's last gasp and the only conclusion we can reach is that the public is really more left than the corporate media would lead you to believe."
***
There are too many books in Stephen Ward's office. So many that I wonder if the bookshelf to my left will collapse under the weight while I listen to him speak about how Indymedia fits into the world of journalism ethics.
I have no doubt Ward has read them all. He has a PhD in Philosophy from the University of Waterloo and was a research fellow at Harvard University before joining UBC's School of Journalism to teach ethics.
He's also quick to say that Indymedia is a good way to provide perspectives on issues that the mainstream media ignore.
"We need to have as many voices as we can get out there," Ward says. "I read [Indymedia] for analysis and perspective of some point-of-view that I'd forgotten or were not aware of."
Still, Ward seems to have difficulty picturing Indymedia as a truly independent Organization.
"Certainly the category 'independent' suggests the mainstream media are not independent and they would argue with that," Ward says.
After some thought Ward decides the "alternative media" label fits Indymedia better. He says that since Indymedia does picture itself as an alternative to the mainstream media, it must have a political slant to do so.
"[Indymedia] is just as attached to certain ideas and groups as the mainstream media are," Ward says. "Just like many other alternative websites, who do have a political point of view and are attached to certain political organisations."
And those ideas are definitely left-wing ones. Ward jokes that he has a hard time finding anything on an Indymedia site that sounds like Conrad Black's voice, but he doesn't have a problem with that. Instead, he says, there should be publications out there willing to uphold different views.
"I don't think [Indymedia] needs to apologise for [being left-of centre], as long as readers are aware that that's what it's doing," he says. "I can smell the political slant in Indymedia very quickly and I'm sure a reader could too."
Then the conversation gets political. Ward says Indymedia is part of a reconstruction of the Left in Canada that traditional left-wing bastions like the NDP have failed to tap into. Speaking frankly, he says left-wing politics in Ottawa is still very standard and has no room for fresh ideas.
"So it's not going to be as attractive to young people as Indymedia is," he says.
It's hard to argue with him. One needs only to catch a glimpse of outgoing NDP leader Alexa McDonough's drab press conferences to see the same party line of big government and big spending spouted by rote to an ever-shrinking group of middle-aged union leaders to see the problem. It's enough to make the eyes quickly glaze over. Ward sees the problem too.
"So far, the NDP hasn't been able to tap into the so-called 'New Left,' that is, people who see themselves more as creating change through networking and global communication," Ward says.
And that networking among the left is taking place at the grassroots level, Ward says. When the WTO protests took place in Seattle, several of Ward's students crossed the border to see first hand what media strategies were being used to cover the protest. One of the things they noticed, he says, was that the alternative media was joining forces with union and civic society magazines to try and get a broader scope of people unified around single causes.
That merging of forces almost suggests a form of media convergence and it seems to have gotten tighter since the WTO. In the three years since 1999, Ward says Indymedia's focus around the anti-globalisation movement—which is naturally loose and decentralised — has forced it to rely more and more heavily on the Internet to network. This networking potential, he says, is Indymedia's greatest strength because it can reach anyone with a computer.
Ward also sees a convergence between Indymedia and the mainstream media on some levels. He says that since writing styles of the alternative and mainstream press are becoming more opinionated and less objective, more and more publications are putting out stories that contain the views of the reporter. Perhaps, Ward says, there are even similarities between Indymedia and the National Post, making me almost drop my pen as I try to scribble that down.
Excuse me, I say. The Post?
He nods.
"There's no doubt that the Post, from the beginning, was out to make a splash and get away from the way traditional media write, that is, balanced, objective and dry," he says. "The Post said 'we're going to have an edge, a point-of-view and not be boring, and if you don't like it, go somewhere else.' "
Indymedia, Ward believes, might be doing the same thing.
***
Kalle Lasn will only do interviews in the early morning, making it hard for me to think straight when I call him at home to talk about his views on Indymedia.
When I do talk to him it turns out he has trouble liking Indymedia, which is surprising considering his day job. As the founder and editor of Adbusters, his magazine has shown images of the American flag slowly turning to ash on the magazine's cover. And that's only recently.
It's more surprising because the first paragraphs of his book Culture Jam talk about how the struggle to topple existing power struggles and forge major adjustments to the way humans live will be the defining battle of the 21st century, in the same manner that the civil rights movement was in the 1960s, feminism was in the 1970s and environmental activism was in the 1980s. This struggle will change the way information flows and how society interacts with the mass media.
Isn't that what Indymedia stands for too?
Lasn doesn't think so. In fact, while Lasn thought Indymedia was an inspiring source of information at the WTO, he believes it has now been co-opted by what he calls the "old left," which is impeding the movement's ability to grow.
"Now, a lot of the time, Indymedia just has too much clutter for me to find it worthwhile," he says. "I find it too noisy."
Largely, Lasn says, this clutter and noise exist because Indymedia suffers from a lack of structure due to its collective atmosphere. Lasn claims to have met with Indymedia organisations all over the world, from Israel to Vancouver, and he says that deep down Indymedia activists conform to old left ideals such as making decisions by consensus and shunning away from editorial leadership.
To change the movement for the better, Lasn says, there needs to be a movement within Indymedia to impose an editorial hierarchy.
"If they did a bit more editing, were a bit [less] indiscriminate in what they put on the site and allowed certain types of editor personalities to take over for some time then I think they would benefit," Lasn says, though he admits there may be some Indymedia sites out there that might not have the benefit of strong leadership.
"Some groups, maybe, don't have visionary leaders and maybe it's better for them to be sitting around a circle and doing things collectively," Lasn says. "But for some other groups, it might be great for someone to take charge and say 'fuck, you know we're going to do things this way from now on' and they don't seem to allow that kind of freedom right now."
Until then, Lasn says Indymedia won't appeal to a larger audience beyond its core readership. Still, he does see the beginnings of change.
"I think [Indymedia] has evolved and they know something isn't quite right but they haven't quite broken through yet," Lasn says. "They're still stuck in that battle for Seattle moment."
To view Indymedia, visit www.indymedia.org
