It has been argued that over the past century the control of information, especially through the mass media, has become the most important characteristic of the culture of war. Why?
It is because there has been such an advance over the past century in democratic participation that the modern state is forced to justify its culture of war. Since people in general do not want war, the state and its military-industrial complex must convince them that military preparations are necessary in the face of external enemies. This is a major change from earlier history when the state was not subject to election by the people and it could pursue its policies regardless of their attitudes.
In fact, we see that the mass media in countries with the most powerful military forces, such as the United States, are pro-military and continually publish propaganda against external enemies and give priority to news about unavoidable violence and disaster. They do not give place to peace initiatives.
If the commercial mass media will not give us news about peace demonstrations, how can we be sure to get it?
The answer is in the alternative media like CPNN that do not rely on advertising and support from the military-industrial-financial complex.
Here are comments in this regard from a recent meeting during Independent Media Week, now in its 13th year in Oregon.
Citing the “unprecedented antagonism of the Trump administration to media,” Jeff Golden, producer of “Immense Possibilities” on Southern Oregon Public TV, said our challenges didn’t start Jan. 20, because, years ago, much of the media abandoned its role in public service and became driven by profit.
This trend greatly increases the need for independent media, he notes, and much of it can flower on the internet.
“We’d be in much deeper trouble than we are now if not for independent media.”
(Click here for earlier discussion on this question.)
This discussion question applies to the following articles: