You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Hi Steemit, My Name Is Elizabeth Vos, Journalist and Editor In Chief at Disobedient Media!
Seems like excellent content and a great range of people who are also supporting you too.
A few questions, what do you think is the biggest current issue in respects to equality and change that people can get involved in? Also, how do you feel that the mainstream media is going to react in the long term to the people creating its own media? The fact that we are no longer reliant on monopolistic sources of news and information surely means that organised change can happen much more easily, yet, with so many voices, how do we stop them all being lost in the sea of voices that now exist? Just some thoughts :-) New here too.
Hi! Thank you for the wonderful question! :) I think the biggest issue re: equality is, as you mention, equality in the media and everyone being empowered to have a voice, equal say, etc. I think great strides have been made in opening up new sources of information to people. There is definitely a lot of unavoidable chatter and even disinformation out there - as well as overt censorship - because the establishment doesn't quite know how to react to this new medium. However I would rather there be totally free speech and a lot of voices to choose from than rely on an external judgement on whose opinion should be heard.
You mentioned mainstream media: I don't think that MSM has an option in how to respond to anti-establishment press without labeling it "fake news." Right now we are seeing a huge increase specifically in censorship because there is no legitimate way that TPTB can respond to criticism.
I think for myself and a lot of other independent journalists, we have been given this amazing opportunity which we don't want to squander - and that opportunity is directly because of the fact that those involved with Wikileaks, Ed Snowden, etc, have been brave enough to provide the public with verified information about our ruling class - in their own words. So in answer to your question about how not to get lost in the noise, I would say that - as so many indie journos do - if you see someone accurately reporting on primary source material like the Wikileaks publications or Snowden files, and legitimately citing all of their conclusions in the grounding of that primary documentation, then that may be worth a listen. On the other hand If someone is discussing a rumor of a rumor with zero evidence to back it up (or even giving a dishonest interpretation of primary material), then one might want to at least take the discussion with a large grain of salt.
I don't know if that answers your very good question, but thank you for asking! Very good topics for discussion. :)
Thanks for replying :-)
I do agree, a free media is important in order to have the voices that need to be heard, especially those who are on the bottom of society. However do you think the powers at be have realised that instead of censoring us (which is blatant and more obvious form of oppression) they have allowed us to have platforms where we can speak our minds, so they can monitor what we say and think, whilst at the same time they can also fill the free media with other disinformation sources that discredit the facts. Thats not to say that the new media is bad, of course it is far better than the previous alternative, but when we are reading our alternative news sources, how do we know that they are not sources created by governments or corporations in order to control the rebellion mindset?
I think if we could verify that somehow it would be good, do you think that happens just with time? People who are more obviously genuine float to the top and then people can see them? I guess it is trust too.
I do agree that the new media is fantastic and it has the potential to alter who controls this world, but my other question is, how do you ensure that this new liberated movement is not covertly taken over by the dark side?
I agree with you, and that is definitely the dark side of the death of legacy press. There are absolutely attempts to poison the independent media well, and some of those are frustratingly successful. The only way I can think of dealing with it, from my perspective, is to try to keep reporting as accurately as possible to provide an honest counter narrative to disinformation whether it's from MSM or anywhere else. Also, there is a clear pattern with these types: They usually accuse legit indie media of being affiliated with Russians, and hate Wikileaks/Assange/Ed Snowden. Anyone who speaks in those anti-whistleblower terms should be treated with maximum caution and skepticism.
Yes I agree with that, the truth will win eventually, by its very nature it is stronger than a lie :-)
Do you ever need writers for your publication? I am definitely on the same side as all of this, and have been writing for over 20 years. Let me know.
I find it weird sometimes that all these platforms that now exist simply did not when I started out, that in itself is a massive leap forward, the democratisation of media to the people. It's definitely the start of global change.
Interesting. I thought your first question/questions were more a question about how to organize large number people for true democratic change when there is such a decentralized source of information now. In Stockholm alone there are a number of protests everyday, everyone of those drawing a few hundred people. It´s like the opportunity for people to find it´s own information the more un-organized we get? Do you see my point?
I guess that is true, but then perhaps true global change will come from a mass of tiny organisations rather than one big movement? in some ways its stronger because it can't be gotten rid of so easily :-)
Good point. Maybe a range of tiny organisations with one common goal. If that's possible... :)
I think different organisations who have different goals can learn to work together, for example, they may be different in many areas but they have may have some common general aims, they could work together within those to change the issue itself, all too often people get caught up in party politics so won't unite behind a certain issue as they don't want to be seen to stand shoulder to shoulder with people they disagree with on other issues, I guess maybe its ego a lot of the time too, a lot of politicians care more about how they appear, than what they actually do. :-/