List of top 30 Feminist blogs, according to linkfluence

I (unfortunately) wasn’t at the Fem 2.0 conference, but I saw a recent post about the happenings over there. A really interesting group called Linkfluence (they visually mapped the sphere of influence of progressive and conservative blogs during the election) presented on the their visual map of the feminist web and made a list of the top 30 feminist blogs (according to their methodology).
Continue Reading

Amy Goodman had a great interview a few days ago with Jane Mayer, author of The New Yorker’s The Insiders: How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin. . The transcript is up at AlterNet. Mayer traces the Palin promotion path–as the new Alaska Governor to the Republican Vice Presidential candidate. There’s a lot of interesting info in the article, but I wanted to pull out two main points.

1) The conservative media helped propel Palin into the national spotlight and basically land the V-P position. They were able to do this because they a) have a successful echochamber and b) their influence is so strong in the beltway, DC circles–the politicos listen to them. This is a stark contrast with the innerworkings and influence of the progressive media.

It all started out with the heads of the conservative media meeting Sarah in her own home in a sort of skewed version of “Who’s coming to lunch?”

The contingent featured three of The Weekly Standard ’s top writers: William Kristol, the magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for the Times and a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, the magazine’s executive editor and the co-host of “The Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; and Michael Gerson, the former chief speechwriter for President Bush and a Washington Post columnist.

This got the ball rolling and when the contingent headed back to D.C., the Palin praise train started rolling out of the station. Mayer notes that many of the lunch guests had become full blown cheerleaders.

The most ardent promoter, however, was Kristol, and his enthusiasm became the talk of Alaska’s political circles. According to Simpson, Senator Stevens told her that “Kristol was really pushing Palin” in Washington before McCain picked her. Indeed, as early as June 29th, two months before McCain chose her, Kristol predicted on “Fox News Sunday” that “McCain’s going to put Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska, on the ticket.” He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball, and possibly siphon off Hillary Clinton’s supporters. He pointed out that she was a “mother of five” and a reformer. “Go for the gold here with Sarah Palin,” he said. The moderator, Chris Wallace, finally had to ask Kristol, “Can we please get off Sarah Palin?”

The next day, however, Kristol was still talking about Palin on Fox. “She could be both an effective Vice-Presidential candidate and an effective President,” he said. “She’s young, energetic.”

But as Mayer noted in her article, by February 2008 the “the chorus of conservative pundits for Palin was loud enough for the mainstream media to take note. Chris Cillizza, reporting for the Web site of the Washington Post, interviewed Palin and asked her if she’d accept an offer to be McCain’s running mate.” Palin demurred at the time, but her star was on the rise. During the V-P selection process, McCain REALLY wanted his good buddy Joe Lieberman, but his political operatives gave him the big “talk to the hand,” noting Joe (the Senator) was too liberal on domestic issues and sent him in the direction of a little-known, arch conservative, charming woman from Alaska. And the rest is history.

I find this fascinating for a few reasons. One, I don’t know of any traditional progressive media outlets or individuals who from the ground up, will actively promote and then crown potential candidates in such a way. The progressive media speculates, bets and discusses to death the pros and cons of various candidate options. When they feel ready (and if they are able), they will endorse. The progressive blogosphere has actually started to fill this gap by actively promoting and raising funds for candidates across the country, but the influence beyond the chorus is unclear.

When you look at the sphere of influence that the conservative publications have within their own party and the mainstream media, it makes you stop for a second to ponder the potential. But maybe that’s the corrupting influence of power overtaking me. The most important take away for me is that the conservative media has made sure that the beltway establishment doesn’t ignore them (or can’t, even if they want to.) The progressive media is starting to move in that direction, but still has a long way to go to have the same level of influence.

2) The other major point of this article that really struck me was the efforts by one man–Adam Brickley and where he came from. Mayer tells Goodman that Brickley was one of the main individuals that lifted Palin up above the masses.

Brickley, who is just out of college, and he is a staunch conservative, he’s looking for somebody who could add some pep to the Republican ticket, and he particularly is worried about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as, you know, a possible combination. So, anyway, he’s looking for a female. And he starts with Wikipedia, and he just looks for all the females in the Republican Party. And he told — I interviewed him — he says at some point, you know, he couldn’t find anybody good, and then he thinks, oh, what about that lady that just got elected in Alaska? So he looks up things about Sarah Palin and sees that she’s considered kind of this rising star.

And so, he starts a blog that’s called Sarah Palin for Vice President Blog. And it starts pushing Palin and gets picked up by many other conservative blogs and then finally works its way into kind of conservative radio, Rush Limbaugh, and the American Spectator, conservative magazines. So there’s this sort of growing groundswell.

Ok-great. We’ve heard the story of the lone ranger become a powerful powerbroker in the blogosphere before. And we love it. But I find this nugget much more interesting.

Mayer says that Brickley has “gone to the Leadership Institute, which is an organization that Morton Blackwell, an evangelical Christian, founded a couple decades ago to train sort of cadres of the right wing…. He’s also received scholarships from various right-wing organizations. He currently is living in a dormitory that’s part of the Heritage Foundation here in Washington, which is another big right-wing think tank. You know, he’s been trained in how to kind of help the conservative movement and how to become part of it. So, he’s pushing Palin, and his blog gets a lot of traffic. And so, there’s kind of this nexus of these forces coming together, both of which are really Washington forces that are pushing Palin.”

The training of young, media savvy progressive political activists is in full swing, but we are still CLEARLY far behind them in the active caring and feeding of them. The conservatives give their young leaders a career path. We give them fits and starts. This is not a new or brilliant notion, it’s just one I wanted to reinforce.

All in all–I’m not interested in the progressive media becoming king or queen makers, but I am interested in determining the means and infrastructure for raising its influence among the individuals and groups that are. What are the first steps? It would actually be interesting to survey D.C. insiders to see what progressive media they consume and why. Who wants to work with me on that???

Over the last few days I was at the Park Center for Independent Media’s inaugural symposium. It was great to hang, talk, learn from and gossip with some of my favorite independent media producers and thinkers. Josh Marshall of the illustrious Talking Points Memo (which will be spotlighted in our upcoming book) was the featured speaker yesterday evening. I twittered my way through the speech and thought it would be fun to share. Start from the bottom up.

Twitter of Josh Marshall's speech...

(If you’re on twitter, check out tweets from @digidave and @AmandaRMichel on the speech as well.)

Trolling through my tweets I saw this gem from the Washington Editor of The Nation. Just who, I wondered, was the magazine pummeling in a dark alley?

Well, as it turns out, they’re taking on the federal government, with a bit of help from some friends:

A few hours after Bush’s signing [of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008], The Nation joined with the ACLU in a lawsuit filed in the US District Court (Southern District) of New York challenging the constitutionality of the Act. The Nation is suing on behalf of itself, our staff and two of our contributing writers–Chris Hedges and Naomi Klein. The defendants are the Attorney General of the United States, Michael Mukasey; John M. “Mike” McConnell, Director of National Intelligence; and Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, Director of the National Security Agency and Chief of the Security Service. We filed suit along with a coalition of other plaintiffs including Amnesty International USA, Human Rights Watch, Global Fund for Women, PEN American Center, Washington Office on Latin America, Service Employees International Union and several private attorneys.

Is it the role of a magazine to join such a lawsuit? Well, as editor Katrina Vanden Heuvel argues, warrentless wiretapping is not just an ominous form of creeping surveillance, it’s also a threat to investigative journalism. In the course of gathering information, independent reporters regularly communicate via phone and e-mail with political dissidents, activists and foreign journalists around the world—exchanges that could be classified as “foreign intelligence information” under the new act. Reporters like Hedges and Klein—who write about sensitive topics in conflict zones—will find it difficult to maintain the confidentiality of their sources under such conditions. “We are proud, then,” she writes, “to join with other patriots who understand the government’s legitimate interest in protecting the nation against terrorism can be fulfilled without sacrificing the constitutional liberties that make the US worth defending.”

F*ckin’ A! Way to “take it to the hill”…

Tags: buildtheechoimpact

So I’ve been a little slow on the blogging the last week and a half and that’s for a couple reasons.
1) I have carpal tunnel and tendonitis in my left wrist. Very painful and hard to type.
2) Jess and I were prepping for a presentation at the academic National Conference for Media Reform pre-conference where we presented our theories and latest examples from our book. (Happy to share if you want. We’re also figuring out how to get it on slide share.)
3) I was also prepping for my moderation of the NCMR panel, “How the Independent Media Makes Change.” In short, the panel rocked. (And I don’t usually say that about panels.) Panelists included Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake, Robert Greenwald of Brave New Films, Jeff Morely of the Center for Independent Media and Daisy Hernandez of ColorLines. I’m going to be posting video and commentary on that asap. (I’m struggling through learning the new Imovie8 and having problems importing. Ah, technology.)

But most of all, I and the rest of The Media Consortium team were consumed by preparations for the launch of Live From Main Street. I could tell you all about it, but let me just repeat snippets of what LFMS host Laura Flanders wrote at the Huffington Post.

A year ago, a group of independent media professionals looked ahead to the 2008 election season. Anticipating the same stump speech in 50 states and the same old reporting to go along with it, they wondered, ‘what if, instead of the candidates’ horse-race, we covered goings-on around the track?’ The project we came up with together is Live from Main Street: a series of live events, in five states in five months, bringing audiences the local perspective on critical national issues.

On June 8, in Minneapolis, Live From Main Street kicked off in the Twin Cities. Locals weren’t just backdrop for a report a national story: they were the main event. On stage — discussing the election, organizing, media and more, were organizers, journalists, artists — sharing their accounts of the free speech challenges their community’s facing in the run-up to the Republican National Convention. And it wasn’t all bad news. Alongside the grim reports of permits denied and protests squashed, we heard the latest word on “unconventional” convention plans — “our roving reporters will be mounted on bicycles connected by GPS” Marlina Gonzales of the UnConvention told Live From Main Street. “Today’s Main Street is a new Main Street” said Malkia Cyril, Executive Director of the Center for Media Justice. Politicians make old assumptions at their peril, she added. It’s not just about bias, it’s about getting the story wrong.

Over the next five months, Live From Main Street will be hosting town-hall type discussions about critical issues in Miami, Denver, Columbus and Seattle. We want to take the agenda-setting out of the hands candidates’ consultants — and put an ear to the voters themselves. In Minneapolis, the focus was on civil liberties and the need for media diversity. In Miami in July, the attention will shift to cities and sustainable development. In Columbus, the topic’s voting; in Seattle, national security from a female point of view. We’ve heard from the politiicans. At the end of the election season, Live From Main Street hopes to have heard– and amplified what voters mean by that catchword “change.”

The first LFMS was an amazing success–with a raucous crowd of 450 people. But instead of me telling you about it: let’s just watch, shall we?

Welcome to Live From Main Street

Amy Goodman on Independent Media

Civil Liberties in the Twin Cities Pre-RNC

Live From Main Street: What the nation can learn from Minnesota