Voices of Revolution: Echoing the Promise Unfulfilled Part I

The history of the United States can be seen as the formalization of the use of media as a primary means of overcoming oppression. Perhaps the dissident press's most daring experiment thus far has been to provoke the British subjects of Colonial America, "to dissolve the political bands" which bound them to most powerful empire of their time. For the 240 years since that media driven revolution the story of the struggle to honor the intention of The Declaration of Independence, and fulfill the promises enshrined in the US Constitution, has been told through an Independent and Activist Media.  More importantly, that struggle has consistently been driven by it.  Rodger Streitmatter's, Voices of Revolution: The Dissident Press in America  (2001 Columbia University Press), recounts the role of Independent Activist Media in forging and reshaping the United States. 

By 1830 the United States had fought and won 2 wars with the British Empire, but was in ever present danger of succumbing to internal struggles and rebellions by unsatisfied citizens of the fledgling nation. The wave of dissident media which rose in response to the crises of the early and mid 19^th century is even more remarkable than the one that sparked the 1776 Revolution in two ways: 1) Whereas the dissidents of the Founding Fathers' generation had sympathetic presses to produce their underground publications, with an ocean between those presses and King George; the Activist Press of the 19^th century had to build itself from the ground up, and do so in proximity to the power it was confronting.  2) Whereas the Founding Fathers were a ready pool of talented writers and intellectuals who could frame their movement (some educated in the best schools of Europe); the Activist Press of the 19^th century consisted mainly of inspired individuals, often rising from humble obscurity to; inform, educate, organize and activate disenfranchised groups; promote political candidates to represent those disenfranchised; draft legislation; and even found political parties. 

With provocative names like: Workingmen's Advocate, The Liberator, The Revolution, Appeal to Reason, and dozens more like them, The Labor Movement, The Abolitionist Movement and The Women's Rights Movement took shape in response to the rallying cry of these passionate and dynamic media entities. Though most of these publications did not survive more than a few years or a few decades, the depth and breadth of their reach, and their ability to effect fundamental change is unparalleled in the history of democratic institutions.

If the dissident press of the 1760’s and 1770’s proved that it could incite the violent overthrow of an oppressive government in order to effect social progress, the dissident press of the 19^th century proved that it could curb oppression and effect social progress through democratic processes, without overthrowing that government. Until this function of the Fourth Estate was delineated and proven to be effective, the viability of the US model of government was anything but certain.

In part two of this series I’ll present an overview of the publishers and publications that defined the role of dissident media in shaping social movements. Part three will show how the Independent Media of today has kept that tradition alive, and adapted to the diverse and evolving media landscape of the 21^st century.

In Plain Sight: Hidden Narratives and the Skewing of Public Opinion

David Archambault, Chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Nation,  spoke to an overflowing crowd at Cornell University’s Stocking Hall on Thursday, February 16, just after 3:30 PM. His presentation, “Standing Rock: The Violation of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights,” took about an hour, after which, Chairman Archambault answered questions from the audience. The event was simulcast by Cornell and can be viewed here.

The first half of the talk dealt with the devastating history of broken treaties, stolen land, massacres and sub-human treatment of the Sioux by the United States Government through policies designed to rob the Sioux of their heritage and huge amounts of wealth. 
The illegal appropriation of the Sioux's land and treasure vastly enriched white America, while leaving the Sioux in abject poverty. According to Archambault, of the ten poorest counties in in the United States today, five are Sioux, and two are at Standing Rock. The Black Hills and all the gold in them were stolen from the Sioux in the 1880’s along with over 50 million acres of land. The fertile river valley, which they were given in exchange, was stolen back in 1944 when the Missouri River was dammed to create the lakes, like lake Oahe, that border their remaining land, and provide the tribe’s drinking water. The original route proposed by DAPL ran under the Missouri River just north of predominantly white Bismarck, ND but was objected to because it might harm Bismarck's water supply.

Chairman Archambault went on to relate the chaotic, corrupt and brutal way the DAPL has been forced upon his people who, earlier that very day, were alluded to as terrorists by Energy Transfer Partners' Executive VP Joey Mahmoud. While biased non factual statements, like Mahmoud's  tend to get some traction in the mainstream media, they do nothing to educate media consumers about the myriad societal issues which intersect in this one story.  

I forwarded a question to Chairman Archambault, which he addressed (1:10:25 into the simulcast), asking whether he was satisfied with the coverage that mainstream media is giving to his people’s cause, and what role independent media is playing in getting the story out. His answer referred to a few problems starting with the tribe’s “concern from the beginning that mass media will not cover this.” He credited social media for “helping this movement to go world wide…people from around the world got to see first hand what’s happening, and it also allowed for mass media to have to turn around and take a look.” He went on to critique mainstream media's coverage of the movement, “We haven’t gotten the media that we’d hoped for, some of it having to do with politics and the types of stories they want to cover.” He mentioned a promised interview with CNN which never materialized because the network left to cover an event elsewhere.  

Even more to the point he referred to his questionable initial assumption, “that the media that was there, was there to help.” He then mentioned an interview by one of the mega media companies that did happen, which he claims had been sliced up to take things out of context so that “it doesn’t help” because it creates division in a “movement based on unity.” 

At home later I decided to take a look at some of the coverage from the mainstream media to see if the story was out there, with enough context provided, so that media consumers could understand the issues. Sadly, most of what I came across was superficial and tended to highlight a development, and then insert the PR responses of the parties and agencies involved. One piece from the NBC News website, dated September 16, 2016, showed real promise. It was fairly informative, had moderated interviews with Chairman Archambault and Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska, and even featured footage from Democracy Now of people being attacked by DAPL employees. It was at least seven minutes and 55 seconds long, so I decided to analyze it.  

The segment aired live at around 11:15 AM on the East Coast and was hosted by an African American woman, whose name is not given (I think it's Joy Reid). After a brief intro by the host, the piece cuts to Democracy Now’s footage of DAPL employees attacking non-violent water protectors with dogs and pepper spray.

 I was expecting her to draw an obvious comparison to the atrocities of the Jim Crow south, and the images of white violence against peaceful African Americans that shocked America during the Civil Rights movement of the late 50’s and early 60’s.

Instead she characterized an attack by DAPL company thugs against US citizens peacefully assembled on Indian land as, “private security guards for the pipeline company, Energy Transfer, using dogs and pepper spray on protestors who stormed the construction site.” This description has the effect of transforming the victim of the attack into the aggressor. I had to watch the segment a few times in order to quote the un-named host properly. In doing so, I noticed that as the Democracy Now footage ended, MSNBC cut back to the female African American host, who was explaining how the tribe was also “fighting the pipeline in court,” (again portraying the victim as aggressor) and that government agencies “stepped in” and halted construction (which gives the impression that the US government agencies charged with oversight are somehow outsiders interfering with justice) though the court rejected the tribes request for an injunction. 'Rejected' carries the implication of obsolescence and unworthiness, 'request' implies there is no fundamental right to redress. 

What is more alarming is that as she is saying this, the background behind her became a horizontally split graphic,

the upper portion an image of a field of fists raised in the traditional ‘Black Power” salute representative of the more militant wing of the Civil Rights movement, which rose in response to the assassinations of MLK and RFK in 1968.

That background image would likely provoke fear and resentment in the psyche of white America, without consumers even being consciously aware of it.  The bottom portion of the background graphic was of workers with vests and hard hats standing beside stacks of pipe waiting to be laid. Next a banner opens on the bottom left portion of this provocative image:  

GOVT. DECISION CAME AFTER FEDERAL JUDGE REJECTED TRIBES REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION 

Again, the wording and placement of this banner is highly questionable. Periodically throughout the rest of the segment when Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska or Dave Archambault would make a reasonable point asserting the justice of the water protectors' cause, the banner would reappear, suggesting the illegitimacy of the statements by advocates for the Sioux: 

GOVT. DECISION CAME AFTER FEDERAL JUDGE REJECTED TRIBES REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION 

I found this particularly repugnant once I became conscious of the hidden narrative of violent Indian protestors preventing American workers from doing their job, 'AFTER A FEDERAL JUDGE REJECTED their REQUEST'. Wow it looks like those unruly Sioux savages are at it again! Where’s General Custer when we need him? Keep in mind, I only became aware of what I was viewing and what it was really saying after watching it four or five times. 
  

That this narrative was not random, but well crafted, highly provocative and intentional, seems likely. It might well be worth investigating who produced, directed and funded the MSNBC piece, and begin looking for similar patterns of subliminal or hidden narratives in other seemingly “unbiased” stories from major media outlets. I would argue that these types of media products are even more problematic than mainstream media's habit of parroting lies or 'alternate facts' without refuting them. 

The most disheartening part of the struggle for a just hearing in the court of public opinion is that it would be extremely difficult to educate media consumers to be savvy enough to perceive the hidden narratives and question them. The problem with corporate media concentration goes well beyond a simple lack of journalistic diversity; media consolidation makes it more likely that a handful of media executives can collude to skew the public’s judgment, or even derail movements for social justice. The subtle spin and hidden narrative I point to in the MSNBC piece underscore Archambault’s assertion at the Cornell event that main stream media's coverage, meager as it is, is essentially counter productive.