Social Climate: Mediating Mob Mentalities (2 of 2)

In a previous examination of the “Social Climate”, we briefly looked at the Mainstream Media’s well established role as a multi-faceted driver of Public Opinion. From here on in we’ll simply presume upon its more or less  overt roles in generating public and social ‘change’ in its representations of Public perceptions, and thus the Political climate itself – hopefully accomplished by creating a well informed and clearly motivated Electorate. From there we can look at a few alternatives, if in fact the Media is too entrenched in it’s Corporately rooted ‘broadcast’ model, to be able to effect meaningful social changes.

We’d all like to believe in old fashioned Democratic values, and that the “Free Press” represented by Mainstream Media remains our most potent resource for communicating the new Social and Cultural conditions that need to evolve into place in order to effect some positive changes to our environment. Even under the ‘ideal’ conditions of the responsive and competitive forms of Western Media, we should still at least confront the very real possibility that the (Corporately backed) nature of Mainstream broadcasting and the Advertising driven business models behind modern “Journalism” are at their root abit too ’self-serving’ and pre-biased to deeply promote any truly disruptive conditions that might be required to effect genuine societal change. At their worst, the large industrial and politicized backings of the Mainstream Media, combines well with it’s enthralling products, to appease many of Societies needs, while also making the Mainstream the most subtly and imperceptibly corruptible tool we have to foster collective Change.

Reminds us of the saying:

If you’re not part of the Solution…

So what keeps the Mainstream Media from changing the World anyhow ?

Nothing.
Nothing keeps the Media from changing the World, and the Media remains (for the most part)  institutionally pre-programmed to simply provide Society with information/entertainment, and then report on the results to it’s advertisers and shareholders.

You see, the Mainstream Media (in general terms) believes that it is simply a reflector of Societies desires, and supplies it’s product accordingly. In a Free-Market system, the Media simply provides what the Market needs/demands, and it is up to independant Producers (ie. Financiers) to develop and package any new or innovative content that would be carried in the Mainstream Media….Which essentially serves as a buyer and distributor of broadcast content.

Ideally, we would remove proper Journalism from this grossly simplified summary of  the “Mainstream Media” as it doesn’t fully fit the model of broadcasting 3rd party content, however it is well known that the business of Journalism no longer has the widely available systemic resources in place to investigate and develop groundbreaking stories, and lacks the topical specialists (or “beat reporters”) who could focus on key issues long enough to develop greater Public Opinion, as was the case historically.

In fact, the world of print journalism is in such a bad state of decline now, that we certainly shouldn’t be counting on that branch of the Mainstream Media to lead the way with any truly revolutionary approaches to forming Public Opinion. At least not until it recognizes the latent value of new models for Journalism, and is willing to risk it’s dwindling advertising base to forge ahead into them.

In it’s defense, the Mainstream Media (via it’s various News Divisions at least) does indeed already foster (or at least broadcast) the obvious cultural trends, and self-evident societal conditions that we are already well aware of when it comes to the Environment,. It will also cover any additional developments that arise through regular PR channels, if not via the ground-breaking work of old-fashioned reporting.  Although the Mainstream could do more to spur Climate Change awareness (for those who aren’t already aware that there’s a problem perhaps), it’s abundantly clear that most Mainstream Media sources are more focused on their primary goals, than in developing/supporting the alternative programming. Understandably, we shouldn’t expect any content that might possibly have any adverse effect on the Mainstreams existing business model!

ie.
Could you imagine (for but one example) a newspaper that dissuaded you from buying it’s print copy, while slandering just about every major industrial and financial advertiser, with a hard line Editorial slant against over-consumption, wastefully indulgent lifestyles,  and Corporate/Governmental excesses? Could you imagine how fast heads would role, or soundlessly disappear from the powerful boardrooms of any major daily, or any other Media company for that matter?

Essentially, the ‘Mainstream’ is geared for attracting audience numbers to drive it’s own Advertising revenues, and it won’t risk this model by taking difficult positions on tricky Social issues that could undermine the goals of their revenue streams. Of course, there is definite short term gain in covering the shocking or spectacular results of “disruptive” issues, but we really shouldn’t expect any in-depth coverage of subjects that would threaten the Corporate status quo.

Thus, aside from the valiant efforts of those devoted few in the immensely overshadowed Small Press and Public Broadcasting channels, and various forms of Independent/Internet Broadcasting, we are still mainly left to our own devices when it comes to learning how to influence our elected representatives. Therefore the prime challenge remains… In our means to behoove Public officials, via a fostered and politically obvious Public Opinion, to achieve at least some of the  required and daring environmental objectives during their political tenures, let alone in time to ratify the necessary agreements at the impending Copenhagen Conference.

So, if the Mainstream is really only going to relate yesterday’s established news to us, just what are the alternate routes to publicizing and achieving a cohesive Societal outlook on key Climate issues? How do we define and distribute clear Societal goals, as well as the means to achieve them? Where is the future of Mass Communications and Public Relations taking us ?

If we were to temporarily rule out the extreme prospects of a complete (presumably bloodless) Socio-Economic Revolutions, or other lessor forms of civil disobedience, and reserve the subject of effective Free Market actions for another occasion, we are left to consider our options under currently existing models for effecting changes in our Society. Since all decisions are ultimately made via our various Governmental processes, we’ll keep with this model for driving ‘Change’ and consider what other catalysts exist (besides the Mainstream media) to spur the changes in Public opinion that would motivate our constitutionally elected officials to update their own mandates.

We’re obviously just scratching the surface here….

So if we’ve effectively outgrown our more localized sense of Public Opinion (as described in a previous installment) , and we can’t really depend on the large Media networks to present us with what we really need to know, if this news doesn’t serve their current business model (as described here), where else can we turn to for both information, and shared consensus on critical issues? The following is an initial list of alternative sources for incisive information, that does not heed the leashes held on traditional Media:

• Mises
• AlterNet
• The Nation
• Mother Jones
• Fair.org
• Democracy Now
• Indy Media
• Open Democracy
• WikiLeaks
• Judicial Watch
• Info Clearing House
• Infowars   Alex Jone’s conspiracy tinted site – Buyer Beware

At the other end of the information spectrum, we could also hope that the Corporate dogs can entice the Media to wag their tails in unison with their own evolving Public communications needs.  Public Relations (PR) is another old industry that’s still striving to grasp and effectively join the modern age of Social Media, and there could be no better reason to evolve and update the ‘broadcast’ mentality of PR, than to take on the goals of Social Responsability/Sustainability in order to generate the kind of understanding and Public perceptions that are so clearly required by CSR initiatives at this point.

Perhaps those newly annointed Corporate Sustainability Execs, and Social Responsability Reps (CSR) can take up the noble cause directly and effectively execute their green-washing campaigns in house (with the support of Marketing) rather than via hired PR flacks, in order to raise awareness for their (ultimately self-serving) initiatives? Perhaps new levels of Corporate transparency, social responsability, and accountability will in fact be enacted and applied which will enable the Business World to actually lead Society into a better future? Barring the possibility of a benevolent collective of business leaders taking the helm of Society,  we should likely hedge our bets against a Corporately led march into a brave new world, by assuring that we still have alternate channels of communication to at least fall back upon, if not actually develop into newer more potent forms of Mass Media…

Collectively, we could plot out some of the future possibilities  for Social Advocacy via alternate channels. Not only channels for communicating Climate Change concerns, but perhaps even a whole range of Social concerns and Politically actionable initiatives as well. All while hopefully learning how to avoid the growing risks of manufactured ‘Groupthink’.  After all, the need for Media literacy is crucial in a Social Climate that is either dangerously tethered to it’s Edu-Tainment mediums, or becoming precariously unhinged from it’s outdated, and possibly even corruptible sources of Mass Media and information.

Please join me in our next installment where we take account of what the Alternative Media has to offer us instead…