Inventing Reality

Home > Other > Inventing Reality > Page 31
Inventing Reality Page 31

by Michael Parenti


  So the ruling class rules but not quite in the way it wants. Its socializing agencies do not work with perfect effect, free of contradictions—or else this book could not have been written or published or understood.

  To best secure their legitimacy and popular acceptance, ruling interests must maintain democratic appearances and to do that they must not only lie, distort, and try to hide their oppressions and unjust privileges, but must occasionally give in to popular demands, giving a little to keep a lot, and presenting themselves as champions of democracy in the doing. In time, the legitimating ideology becomes a two-edged sword. Bourgeois hypocrisies about “fair play” and “democracy” are more than just a ruse. Such standards sometimes put limitations on ruling-class oppression once the public takes them seriously and fights for them.

  In sum, the capitalist monopoly culture, like its monopoly economy, suffers—shall we say—from internal contradictions. It can invent and control just so much of reality. Its socialization is an imperfect one and sometimes self-defeating. Like any monopoly it cannot rest perfectly secure because it usually does not serve the people and is dedicated to the ultimately impossible task of trying to prevent history from happening. The life of a people creates a reality that can only be partly explained away by the dominant cultural and communicational institutions. The struggle for social justice in this and other countries ebbs and flows but is never permanently stilled by police clubs nor forever smothered by the outpouring of propaganda machines. The longing for peace and betterment, for security and equality, found in the growing consciousness of people everywhere, bursts forth at unexpected times, as multitudes struggle to claim back their land, environment, and productive capacity, their politics and culture, their images and their reality. The democratic forces of this and other societies have won victories in the past against tremendous odds and will win more in the future. Indeed, the future itself depends on it.

  Appendix

  A Guide to Alternative Media

  There are millions of people, fed up with the propaganda of the corporate-owned media, who are looking for alternative sources of information. The following should be of assistance.

  MEDIA-WATCH PUBLICATIONS

  There are some excellent watchdog publications whose function is to expose the distortions and omissions of the mainstream media:

  • Alliance Report, National Alliance of Third World Journalists, P.O. Box 43208, Washington DC 20010

  • Alternative Media, Alternative Press Syndicate, P.O. Box 775, Madison Square Station, New York, NY 10010

  • Alternative Press Index, Alternative Press Center, P.O. Box 33109, Baltimore, MD 21218

  • Extra! Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), 130 West 25th Street, New York, NY 10001

  • Lies of Our Times, Institute for Media Analysis (Ellen Ray and William Schaap, directors), 145 W. 4th St., New York, N.Y. 10012

  • Propaganda Review, Bldg. D, Fort Mason Center, San Francisco, CA 94123

  • 10 Best Censored Stories, Project Censored, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA 94928 (issued only once a year)

  ALTERNATIVE PERIODICALS AND NEWSPAPERS

  Despite repeated claims that ours is a pluralistic, democratic society, alternative media are not readily accessible in the United States.

  There has been a long history of suppression of ideologically unacceptable newspapers and magazines. See Geoffrey Raps, The Campaign against the Underground Press, San Francisco: City Lights, 1981; Angus Mackenzie, “Sabotaging the Dissident Press,” Columbia journalism Review, March/April 1981.

  For a history of media activism, see David Armstrong, Trumpet to Arms: Alternative Media in America, Boston: South End Press, 1981. A good how-to-do-it book is Charlotte Ryan, Prime Time Activism: Media Strategies for Grassroots Organizing (Boston: South End Press, 1991.)

  Progessive newspapers and periodicals are not commonly found at neighborhood newsstands or bookstores. Here is a partial listing of publications that offer information and analysis usually unavailable in mainstream media:

  • CovertAction Information Bulletin, 1500 Massachusetts Avenue NW #732, Washington, DC 20005

  • The Guardian, 24 West 23rd Street, New York, NY 10010

  • Monthly Review, 155 West 23rd Street, New York, NY 10011

  • The Nation, 72 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10011

  • People’s Weekly World, 235 West 23rd Street, New York, NY 10011

  • Political Affairs, 235 West 23rd Street, New York, NY 10011

  • The Progressive, 409 East Main Street, Madison, WI 53703

  • Z Magazine, 150 West Canton, Boston, MA 02118

  For a more complete listing of progressive publications that deal with culture, environment, human rights, Third World struggles, peace, armaments, public interest, consumer issues, and media, see Progressive Periodicals Directory, edited by Craig Canan, Progressive Education, P.O. Box 120574, Nashville TN 37212.

  ALTERNATIVE BROADCAST MEDIA AND VIDEOS

  Along with print media there are alternative broadcast media. Here is a partial listing:

  • Deep Dish Satellite Network distributes programming to public access cable channels across the nation: 339 Lafayette Street New York, NY 10012.

  • Pacifica Radio, 3729 Cahuenga Boulevard West, North Hollywood, CA 91604, has community-supported radio stations in Los Angeles (KPFK), San Francisco (KPFA), New York (WBA1), Washington, DC (WPFW), and Houston (KPFT).

  • Paper Tiger Television, a public access television program with video tapes available: 165 West 91st Street, New York, NY 10024.

  Scores of other listener-sponsored “community radio” stations like KBOO in Portland, Oregon; WORT in Madison, Wisconsin; KGNU in Boulder, Colorado; and WMNF in Tampa, Florida, provide alternative news and commentary. These are not to be confused with “public radio” stations affiliated with NPR that are partially “listener sponsored” but heavily dependent on corporate “underwriters” (advertisers) and government funding.

  For alternative audio and video material, consider the following:

  • Alternative Radio, 1814 Spruce Street, Boulder, CO 80302, David Barsamian’s syndicated program, offers interviews and lectures for noncommercial community stations in the US and Canada.

  • California Newsreel, 630 Natoma Street, San Francisco, CA 94103: films and videos of social issues, including the excellent video “Controlling Interests.”

  • Third World Newsreel, 335 West 38th Street, New York, NY 10018: films and videos of social issues with special focus on the Third World and imperialism.

  • Cinema Guild, 1697 Broadway, Suite 802, New York, NY 10019: films and videos of social issues.

  • Direct Effect, P.O. Box 423, Athens, GA 30603: public service announcements that go beyond the pap of the corporate-dominated Advertising Council.

  • Media Network, 39 West 14th Street, Room 403, New York, NY 10011: a clearinghouse for information on social issue media.

  • People’s Video, P.O. Box 99514, Seattle, WA 98199: modestly priced audio and video tapes of this author’s lectures. Listing available upon request; nonprofit, all labor is donated, including mine.

  • Prevailing Winds Research, P.O. Box 23511, Santa Barbara CA 93121: catalog.

  Public access cable is increasingly being used as a resource by progressive groups to show documentaries and other videos in their communities.

  BOOKS

  Dissident books are not usually published by mainstream publishers. (This volume is one of the exceptions.) They are not usually reviewed in the national media and when they are, they are likely to be savaged—unlike conservative tracts. Dissident books are usually published by small book companies dedicated to an alternative viewpoint. Unfortunately, as with everything else in the American industry, bookstores are monopolized by giant chains like Crown, B. Dalton, and Waldenbooks, which rarely carry titles issued by the small presses. The following are some publishing houses that offer progressive titles. You can write to them directly for
their catalogs.

  • Common Courage, P.O. Box 702, Monroe, ME 04951

  • International Publishers, 381 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10016

  • Lawrence Hill, 230 Park Place, Suite 6A, Brooklyn, NY 11238

  • Monthly Review Press, 122 West 27th Street, New York, NY 10001

  • Sheridan Square Press, 145 West 4th Street, New York, NY 10012

  • South End Press, P.O. Box 68, Astor Station, Boston, MA 02123

  • Verso, 15 Greek Street, London Wl, United Kingdom

  • Zed Books, 171 First Avenue, Atlantic Highlands, NJ 07716

  Notes

  Chapter 1, From Cronkite’s Complaint to Orwell’s Oversight

  1. Michael Parenti, Make-Believe Media: The Politics of Entertainment (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992).

  2. Marguerite Michaels, “Walter Wants the News to Say a Lot More,” Parade, March 23, 1980, p. 4. Cronkite had his show canceled after he made a liberal public speech that criticized an aspect of US foreign policy: Ben Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, 3rd ed. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1990), p. 36.

  3. One of the significant right-wing salvos against the press was by Vice President Spiro Agnew: New York Times, November 14, 1969 and November 21, 1969.

  4. Walter Laqueur, “Foreign News Coverage: From Bad to Worse,” Washington Journalism Review, June 1983, p. 34. Laqueur’s article is a typical example of blaming the reporters, as is Barry Commoner’s “Talking to a Mule,” Columbia Journalism Review, January/February 1981.

  5. Jeff Cohen, “U.S. Media Aren’t Flostile to the Right,” Oakland Tribune, June 27, 1985.

  6. Garner Ted Armstrong, Channel 9 News, Ithaca, NY, February 11, 1976.

  7. Robert Elias, The Politics of Victimization (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).

  8. Ibid, and the studies cited therein.

  9. Consider how the press treats racism in sports: Richard Lapchick, Broken Promises: Racism in American Sports (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984).

  10. Time, December 12, 1983, p. 84.

  11. Ibid.

  12. Studies cited in Ismael Reed’s op-ed article, New York Times, April 9, 1991.

  13. Time, December 12, 1983, p. 84.

  14. See attacks in New York Times, October 10, 1990; Washington Post, September 23, 1990; Wall Street Journal, April 23, 1990. For a critique of these attacks see Sandra Rattley, “White Bread Ffistory,” Lies of Our Times, January 1991, pp. 4-5.

  15. Herb Boyd, “Black Conservatives,” Lies of Our Times, January 1991, p. 10.

  16. New York Times, August 21, 1989, and April 4, 1990.

  17. New York Times, April 1 1, 1989.

  18. Extra! January/February 1989.

  19. New York Times, April 11, 1989.

  20. Tiffany Devitt, “Abortion Coverage Leaves Women out of the Picture,” Extra! March/April 1991, p. 5.

  21. Susan Douglas, “The Representation of Women in the News Media,” Extra! March/April 1991, p. 3; Laura Fraser, “All the Women Fit to Print,” Extra! March/April 1991, pp. 8-9.

  22. Herbert Gans, “The Message behind the News,” Columbia journalism Review, January/February 1979, p. 45.

  23. Michael Grossman and Martha Kumar, Portraying the President (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981).

  24. Howard Rosenberg, “Welcome to the Media-Reagan Show,” Los Angeles Times, June 16, 1986; Mark Hertsgaard, On Bended Knee: The Press and the Reagan Presidency (New York: Farrar Straus Giroux, 1988).

  25. See the poll in Newsweek, March 9, 1987.

  26. See the survey in Editor & Publisher, November 3, 1984.

  27. Ben Bagdikian, The Effete Conspiracy (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), pp. 146, 148.

  28. Mark Dowie, “How ABC Spikes the News,” Mother Jones, November/December 1985, p. 38.

  29. John Kenneth Galbraith quoted in a speech by Ed Asner, president of the Screen Actors Guild, San Francisco, June 21, 1984.

  30. Public Opinion, June/July 1980. For similar, more recent findings, see Report of the Markle Commission on the Media and the Electorate (New York: The Markle Foundation, 1990).

  31. Doris Garber, Mass Media and American Politics (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1980), pp. 169-180.

  32. W. Lance Bennett, News, The Politics of Illusion (New York: Longman, 1983), pp. 9—10.

  33. Jimmie Rex McClellan, The Two-Party Monopoly (Ph.D. dissertation, Institute for Policy Studies, Washington, D.C., 1984), p. 108.

  34. Simon Gerson, correspondence in the Columbia Journalism Review, March/April 1981.

  35. Frank Smallwood, The Other Candidates: Third Parties in Presidential Elections (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1983), pp. 9—10.

  36. Commoner, “Talking to a Mule,” p. 31.

  37. McClellan, Two-Party Monopoly, p. 188.

  38. Quoted in ibid., pp. 184—185; see also, Smallwood, The Other Candidates.

  39. McClellan, Two-Party Monopoly, pp. 188—189.

  40. Ibid., p. 209.

  41. Ronald Van Doren, Charting the Candidates ’72 (New York: Pinnacle, 1972), p. 206. Spock had five brief appearances on national television, each a few minutes or so, only one of which was in prime time: McClellan, Two-Party Monopoly, pp. 209-210.

  42. David Lindorff, “Marginalizing the Left,” Lies of Our Times, March 1991, p. 17; New York Times, November 7, 1991.

  43. P. Lazarsfeld, B. Berelson, and H. Gaudet, The People’s Choice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948); C. I. Hovel et al., Experiments on Mass Communication (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1949).

  44. New York Times, January 16, 1986.

  45. S. Iyengar, M. Peters, and D. Kinder, “Experimental Demonstrations of the 'NotSo-Minimal’ Consequences of Television News Programs,” American Political Science Review, 76, December 1982, p. 852.

  46. G. R. Funkhouser, “The Issues of the Sixties,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 37, pp. 62-75; Michael MacKuen and Steven Coombs, More than News (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1981).

  47. Sut Jhally, Justin Lewis, and Michael Morgan, The Gulf War: A Study of the Media, Public Opinion and Public Knowledge (Amherst, MA: Center for Studies in Communication, 1991).

  48. The point was first made by Bernard Cohen, The Press and Foreign Policy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1963).

  49. Herbert Schiller, The Mind Managers (Boston: Beacon Press, 1973), p. 11.

  Chapter 2, “Freedom of the Press Belongs to the Man Who Owns One”

  1. Ben Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, 3rd ed. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1990), pp. 21-24; Benjamin Compaine, ed., Who Owns the Media? (New York: Harmony Books, 1979; Michael Parenti, Make-Believe Media: The Politics of Entertainment (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992), pp. 181-184; Alex Jones, “Newspaper Sale; A Trend Continues,” New York Times, February 2, 1985.

  2. Washington Post, October 11, 1987.

  3. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, Ch. 1.

  4. Wall Street journal, January 10, 1985.

  5. William Barrett, “Citizens Rich,” Forbes, December 14, 1987, pp. 141 — 148.

  6. Doug Henwood, “Times Mirror: Up from ‘Manliness,’ ” Extra! January/February 1991, p. 8; New York Times, January 10, 1986; USA Today, January 5, 1988.

  7. Alex Jones, “Will Profits Still Grow?” New York Times, August 27, 1989.

  8. Washington Post, January 8, 1991; New York Times, August 8, 1988.

  9. Martin Lee and Norman Solomon, Unreliable Sources (New York: Lyle Stuart, 1990), p. 69; Washington Post, July 15, 1991.

  10. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, pp. 5—8.

  11. Peter Dreier and Steve Weinberg, “Interlocking Directorates,” Columbia Journalism Revieiv, November/December 1979, pp. 51—68; Compaine, Who Owns the Media?

  12. Dreier and Weinberg, “Interlocking Directorates,” pp. 51—68.

  13. Extra! October/November 1989, p. 9.

  14. Extra! January /February 1990, p. 11.

  15. Dreier and Weinberg, “Interlocking Dire
ctorates,” p. 51.

  16. Hal Himmelstein and Allen Lichtenstein, “Who’s Running the Show? Profiles of the Board of Directors of Six of America’s Most Powerful Electronic Media Conglomerates,” unpublished monograph, February 1986.

  17. James Aronson, The Press and the Cold War (Boston: Beacon Press, 1970), p. 19.

  18. Ron Powers, The Newscasters (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1977).

  19. Lee and Solomon, Unreliable Sources, p. 66.

  20. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, pp. 83-84.

  21. Stephen Hess, The Washington Reporters (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1981), pp. 136—166.

  22. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, pp. 128-129.

  23. Ibid., pp. 131-132. Life and the Saturday Evening Post were revived years later under different formats.

  24. A Gallup poll found 79 percent approval for serious investigative reporting, with 66 percent wanting to see more of it: Ted Smith, “Journalism and the Socrates Syndrome,” Quill, April 1988, p. 16.

  Chapter 3, Who Controls the News?

  1. Ben Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, 3rd ed. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1990), p. 6.

  2. Les Brown, Television, The Business behind the Box (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971), pp. 219-220.

  3. William Barrett, “Citizen Rich,” Forbes, December 14, 1987, p. 142.

  4. Interview in Cosmopolitan, July 1986, quoted in Extra! July 1987.

  5. Diana Tillinghast, “Inside the Los Angeles Times,” unpublished monograph, 1980, quoted in David Paletz and Robert Entman, Media Power Politics (New York: Free Press, 1981), p. 15.

  6. Ben Bagdikian, The Effete Conspiracy (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), p. 76.

  7. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, p. 42.

  8. Jorgensen memorandum published in Columbia journalism Review, January/ February 1985, p. 18.

  9. Herbert Gans, Deciding 'What’s News (New York: Vintage, 1979), p. 101.

  10. Ibid., p. 342n.

  11. Edwin Bayley, Joe McCarthy and the Press (New York: Pantheon, 1981), pp. 139-141.

 

‹ Prev