Media Nominations

Mainstream media has traditionally been closely linked to “paid media” (advertising), because of the long-standing tradition of bifurcation in these traditional media channels — namely that “free content” is “ad-supported”.

For many decades, the apparent duality of content was maintained in many societies — primarily those in which the publishing industry played a significant role in launching propaganda campaigns supported by industrial interests, thereby forming a “coalition of the willing” to propagate this myth.

More or less coincidentally — but by no means insignificantly — the economic structures of employment, labor contracts, etc., which are deeply intertwined with the capitalistic germs of 19th Century industrialization, a fanatical idealization of a purportedly “free press” followed in the 20th Century led to the confluence of mainstream media and industrial interests, such that being on par with mainstream interests became closely tied to employment opportunity and/or supporting capitalism in general. Essentially, mainstream media supported capitalism and capitalism supported mainstream media — and in countries where this fusion of interests was most advanced, not supporting capitalism (and the regulations and laws associated with this form of economic structure) became more and more a sign of being awkward and/or an iconoclast.

Yesterday, a friend of mine declared that a particular article which appeared in a particular mainstream media channel was “not fluff” (I am not identifying the person, because not only was the discussion private in nature, but also because in my opinion it simply doesn’t matter here). I disagreed, basically indicating a quick and fleeting impression of the above brief historical sketch and/or outline of “mainstream media” (which is perhaps best elucidated by Noam Chomsky’s extensive work — e.g. Manufacturing Consent).

Once (for example: in Colonial and Revolutionary America), a “free press” was a very fundamental and basic “natural” right. Today, it is often more of a fiction — and in its place stands a “mainstream media industrial complex”, essentially based on an ideology of capitalism. Today, to criticize any of the catastrophic results of unfettered capitalism is to launch an attack on mainstream media — a media built on a deranged mythological notion of freedom fused with employment.

For most of the last century mainstream media grew in leaps and bounds to become a gigantic ship — a titanic information vessel sitting on top of an empty horizon. With the advent of the Internet, this huge ship has become increasingly surrounded by alternative media icebergs, which in sharp contrast to mainstream media are hardly visible to the general population.

So far, the indoctrination of the masses with the mainstream “freedom and employment” myth has been rock steady, but increasingly an increasing malaise is spreading across the world: a disenchantment with the spectre of fanatically “free market” capitalist media pollution.

Although these trends are obvious, they are not depicted in mainstream media. Mainstream media are still banking on followers who believe in and support the “freedom and employment” capitalist mythology. As small business markets become ever more efficient, the traditional economies of “scale” are retreating into ever fewer market segments. Presently, capitalism still has a stranglehold on the financial markets, but the increasing murmurs and outcries are leading to a rising din of dissatisfaction that may even envelope this last refuge for “mainstream interest“.

Increasingly — to use Chomsky’s metaphor — the manufactured popularity is giving way to a more populist kind of mainstream media: increasingly, TV stations and newspapers are out; and increasingly, wikis and blogs are in. Increasingly, media requires ever less capital investment; increasingly, mainstream is becoming less devoted to wild and unfettered capitalism. Increasingly, the notion that financial returns on investment and monetary earnings reports are the only indicators of profit are being called into question by increasing numbers of people.

I have a hunch that the notion of mainstream is undergoing radical change — the traditional devotion to capitalism is giving way to an “alternative mainstream”… but so far, that alternative is an unknown. So far, it doesn’t have a face; so far, it doesn’t have a name; so far it has no ethics, no demands, no party program,…. So far it seems like it has nothing.

Media Nominations Post Forum