Interesting how in the same day that there is an article on the MSNBC website that describes how Rupport Murdoch is further expanding his media empire there is also an article on how bloggers are trying to form a union. In my mind, at least, this definitely juxtaposes two entirely different communication outlets apparently pursuing a similar endeavor, though for vastly different reasons.
With Murdoch trying to expand his reach to be more international, and also to expand his coverage from financial news into general news, one can only wonder about the amount of concentrated power that one person can control, wield and influence here.
Bloggers have the hope of being at least a partial antidote to this concentrated growth. But let’s consider that maybe we need both bloggers and big media. Especially if they can each be “checks and balances” of the other. Doesn’t each portray a distinct point of view worth evaluating?
We’ve all seen how bloggers and user-supplied video sites can develop enough viewership to become news stories in the traditional media outlets. A blogger has other tools, too, such as RSS, SEO, and sites like Digg, to build his audience and get his message out. Once a blogger has his fan base, doesn’t he also wield a mighty sword in getting his message or agenda across? The blogger however has the blogosphere and netiquette to keep him honest and hold him accountable for any undisclosed special interest leanimgs he may have. The TV and print media viewers can do their own voting, too, but with their wallets in deciding whether or not to purchase/read/view the mainstream media stories.
Bloggers can hold the media moguls accountable. And the traditional media outlets will report on what the most popular bloggers, podcasters, and videographers are doing, too. Let’s instead put our focus on education and Internet connectivity, so that the people can be a better judge of good information and biased/unbiased points of view. After all, it is no secret about which newspapers, radio announcers, etc are left-, right-, middle-leaning, etc.
I personally love the grassroots-type of movements that are able to get enough momentum to cut through the mainstream. I’d like to see bloggers and “grassrooters” work on a more informal and impromptu banding together as needed to establish enough critical mass to get an actionable message across when the time and situation calls for it, kind of like the “flash mob” concept depicted in an early CSI episode. However, it must definitely be centered around some solid ethical standards for it to be effective and orderly.
Social activism is more and more popular these days. We have George Clooney active against Darfur; Bono and Company’s Red campaign; etc. With so much publicity about making a difference in the world, and millions of dollars being raised, it still feels like the problems of the world aren’t getting better. So, while the momentum is building, complacency is still lurking very close by.
The latest cause that caught my attention was hearing Katie Couric talking about the humanitarian crisis growing in Iraq, especially around the shortage of water. How can we make a difference, simply by trying. Organizing as many people as possible, whenever possible.
Let’s keep all media outlets open, but be aware of which can help us for the cause we are seeking help for. Case in point, consider the story about Anita Roddick the former Body Shop owner who sold her company so that she could take a meaningful stand on issues that are important to her.
“The campaigns that profitable public companies like the Body Shop can back—the ones that don’t upset the balance sheet—just aren’t the radical types of messages that I’m interested in today.”
