Past issues of the Indyreader

Winter 2009/2010 Issue 13

indyreader13.jpg
THIS ISSUE: 

No matter what your political or ideological orientation might be, it’s become increasingly difficult to ignore the “crisis” in the world of media. Newspapers are downsizing, magazines are going bust or ceasing print production in favor of a cheaper, but much less substantive online format, and every day there’s yet another casualty in the bookstore world. You can’t read an op-ed section any more without running into somebody waxing poetic about the “death of print,” or lamenting the “end of journalism.” Yeah, we’re just going to go ahead and call bullshit on that. Welcome to the Indypendent Reader, one of the many sources for independent journalism that’s doing just fine.

There’s this thing that happens where people refer to “The Media” as a single, monolithic entity. I’ve fallen for that myself. And certainly, the past few decades have seen more than their share of media consolidation and mega-mergers. The world braced itself for a time when all the news came to us from a single source. That source would claim objectivity, obviously, but of course we would know better.

But then a funny thing happened: “The Media,” as we know it, fell apart. Returns on advertisements fell as newspaper readership dropped, so the newspapers lost their money. More and more people started getting their news online, forgoing even television, and suddenly publishers and journalists alike began to lose their jobs.

But as the illusory monolith of The Media fades away, independent media grows. The rise of Indymedia, then blogs, and now Twitter are letting us tell our own stories as soon as they happen.

The myth of objectivity seems fallen by the wayside, as well: now, when you’re reading an article, you know the author’s biases, because as often as not they just come out and say them. And that’s not a bad thing; so-called “objectivity” has given way to a new journalistic ethics, one that doesn’t tell us we have to hide our politics, our opinions, our experiences behind an all-too-thin veneer of disengagement from the world around us.

Print, and journalism in general, aren’t dying. They never will. What’s happening is that they’re changing. And not very comfortably or incrementally. We’re in the midst of a revolution, it turns out. There are going to be a lot of false starts, of promising projects that just don’t hold up in the modern world, but there are also going to be a lot of models that do work.

And if we’re lucky, we’re not going to settle on just one idea of what “The Media” ought to be. We’re going to have thousands of ideas. Diversity is strength because a diverse system is more robust: when one component fails, it doesn’t drag the entire system down.

What happened is that one element of modern journalism—the sale of advertisements—began to fail, and it brought down pretty much the entire thing. Whatever replaces the twentieth century model will be, by necessity, significantly more flexible.

But as long as there are printing presses, there will be print.

This issue of the Indyreader explores the history of the underground press in Baltimore and beyond, shedding light on the forerunners of the media revolution. We talk to Baltimore Brew, contemporary pioneers who are exploring how best to develop web-based journalism.

This issue also speaks to the ways in which the media we consume shapes our desires and our assumptions about the world. Because it does: by choosing what to include and what not to include (a decision necessary in any editorial process), journalists speak as definitively about what isn’t news as much as what is. And this is what independent media has always sought to rectify: we’ve always explored other points of view than those pushed by the mainstream press. Every time we publish a paper—or a blog post, for that matter—we’re able to say that, for example, sex workers and drug dealers and violent protesters are actually people. We’re able to challenge some of the basic premises that the mainstream world tries to slip past us, and we’re able to show ourselves and others that we can and should challenge our system at its most fundamental level. That work has always been revolutionary.

And now, at last, we find ourselves free of the shadow of that impenetrable monolith, “The Media.” And we’ve all got work to do.

–Margaret Killjoy

Spring/Summer 2009 Issue 12

indycover.jpg
THIS ISSUE: 

This special national issue of the Indypendent Reader comes out of a conference held in Baltimore this March called the City From Below, which was co-organized by the Indyreader, Participation Park (a political project centered around a community garden on a reclaimed vacant lot in East Baltimore), and Red Emma’s Bookstore Coffeehouse, a worker-owned and democratically managed collective project in Baltimore’s Mt. Vernon neighborhood.  The conference came out of our recognition that all of our projects were in very concrete ways focusing their energies on what might be called a politics of urban infrastructure – working towards a media platform for Baltimore’s social movements, creating a public space and sustainable urban agricultural alternative, building a business oriented not towards profit but  towards social justice, and the distribution of radical information – and in a way such that all of our individual projects reinforce each other through the larger horizontal networks of social movements we all exist within.


For us and our projects, this kind of mutually reinforcing dynamic is one of the most exciting things about this kind of city-centric activism and organizing – it’s not only that we’re working to make the cities we live in a better place, but in some sense, it’s the city itself that’s working towards this goal.  Taken to its limit, it’s a vision of urban democracy where the city’s inhabitants themselves directly control the way the city works and how it grows – not in the sense that they get to elect a mayor or a councilperson once every few years, but that they actively participate in a thriving fabric of locally controlled projects and initiatives which build and manage the urban environment.


And it’s this that led us to put together conference we wound up calling “The City From Below.”  From the start, we worked under the assumption that “another conference was possible.” We wanted to organize something that wouldn’t solely consist of experts detached from - and above - social movements  talking to a passive audience, but that we could really drive the conference “from below”- with social movements setting the agenda and the tone of the conversations to be had.  We consulted with social justice organizations here in Baltimore as a part of the conference organizing process, in particular building a strong partnership with the United Workers as they ramped up the organizing for their own major event, the B’More Fair and Human Rights Zone March on the Inner Harbor. We prioritized inviting and funding the travel for groups that were working at the grassroots level in radical ways to address urban injustice, getting folks like Miami’s Take Back the Land, NYC’s Picture the Homeless, and Boston’s City Life/Vida Urbana to Baltimore for the conference.  And we did this all without any financial support from universities or big grant-makers, relying instead on the power and energy within our own social movement networks to pull it off.  While there are many things we could have done better, overall we felt we did a good job of living up to the Zapatista slogan from which we drew part of the conference title – “from below and to the left” – a description of a politics which starts from the bottom-up, in which the process of figuring out where we’re going and how we’re getting there is a dialogue, an experiment and a conversation in which we listen to each other and decide on our goals, our strategy, and our tactics together.


The response we received to our calls for participation (more proposals than we could accommodate in a packed three-day program) confirmed our initial assumption that there was indeed something really productive about using “the city” as a way to think and act on a multiplicity of political concerns in a shared framework.  As capitalism tries to give itself a green makeover, thinking about urban sustainability reveals the unavoidable connections between food supplies, public spaces, common lands, and inexcusable inequalities based in race and class divisions.  Thinking about art in the city leads you to think about the role that artists play in gentrification, and drives groups, like Brooklyn’s Not An Alternative, to work out ways that cultural producers can involve themselves instead in urban social justice struggles.  Thinking about social movements in the city leads you to think about how they communicate, what stories they tell themselves and others, how they preserve and transmit their own history, and how they use media to agitate and organize.  Thinking about the millions of people in prison in the U.S. makes you connect the dots between a crumbling economy, institutionalized racism, and the militarized approach to policing exemplified by the “War on Drugs.”   “The City From Below” was broad enough of a platform to bring together insurgent urban planners and designers with the members of a social movement mobilizing shack-dwellers and other dispossessed communities to fight displacement and evictions in the wake of post-Apartheid South Africa’s enthusiastic embrace of neoliberal development policies, and at the same time, focused enough that a real conversation, productive for all parties involved, might just take place.        


Perhaps nowhere was this ability of “the city” to draw together multiple strands of struggle and resistance into concrete problems and potential new avenues of collective action for social justice more apparent than in the multiple presentations which dealt with the impact of the current economic crisis on the city.  While, at the national level, the crisis plays out in the stratosphere of financial capital, with bailouts and bankers, the effects in the city are much more real.  While fictitious assets vanish from the corporate balance sheets, real homes disappear as families are foreclosed on, real public infrastructure crumbles as budgets are slashed.  Formulating an appropriate radical response to the crisis from below was a major concern of many who presented at the conference – how does a community stop foreclosures through direct action?  How can foreclosed or abandoned properties be reappropriated to bypass now generally discredited market mechanisms and directly provide housing to those who need it?  How do we build communities of care and sustainable food systems that provide what we all need to live, outside of disastrously unstable (and fundamentally exploitative) globalized financial systems?  The economic crisis is not just an aberration, but points towards serious contradictions in the capitalist system – built on the creation of speculative wealth and the transfer of power away from the people who have to suffer the consequences, this is perhaps no where more evident than in the city, where the prevailing model of development “from above” and for the benefit of the already privileged has used imaginary property values to replace neighborhoods with condominiums, to subsidize private projects like hotels and casinos instead of public projects like schools and hospitals.  The bursting of the housing bubble and the domino effect bringing down banks and insurance companies is just a symptom of the real crisis – an economy of privatization and dispossession, undemocratic to the core, which puts the markets and profit first and the real needs of people a distant second.  


Perhaps the most inspiring thing about “The City From Below” was the way in which one could see, in the various overlapping initiatives and struggles represented at the conference, the glimmers of an appropriate response.  This response is one which contests the dominance of private property and private interests in directing urban development, which asserts the right of the city’s inhabitants to housing, food, and above all to dignity, and which reimagines urban space as a site of collective experimentation and the construction of alternatives rather than a territory to be controlled and managed.  And this response, the outlines of which the conference helped us see, is to be constructed out of what makes the city beautiful – not politicians and bureaucrats or speculators and developers, but people living together, learning from each other, sharing spaces, working and fighting side by side, building a future together.  It is a vision not only of a just and equitable city, but of the reinvention and reinvigoration of urban democracy it would take to make such a city real.


We wanted to make sure that the discussions and ideas that resonated with us so strongly the weekend of the conference continued to resonate in larger and larger circles; these are important things that need to be said, and heard, and reworked and reimagined, cross-pollinating with other ideas, with other organizations that weren’t able to make it to Baltimore, with other perspectives on the city.  To that end, we tried to document “The City From Below” as best we could – and in fact much of the weekend’s sessions can be viewed online at cityfrombelow.org.  But over a hundred hours of video footage is not a way to bring someone into a conversation, and so we arrive at the object in your hands now – which combines material from the conference itself with further reflections by some of the participants and beyond, and is intended simultaneously for widespread distribution through the vibrant networks of creative urban activism across the country and beyond, as well as for the normal Baltimore audience of the Indypendent Reader.  It’s a single piece of a larger conversation, and we hope you find it interesting and useful. 


—John Duda

for the City from Below Organizing Crew



winter '08–spring '09 issue 11

coverartname.jpg
THIS ISSUE: 

The nation's economy has taken a deep dive into a recession. It is becoming increasingly more vital to reevaluate every aspect of our lives. Afterall, what does your socioeconomic status offer? Can you afford a decent education? Can you afford to buy healthy, vitamin enriched food? Can you keep your electricity bill paid? Can you afford a healthcare plan? The last question normally draws a shudder. The dismal truth is that many citizens cannot financiallly invest in the future of their health. Yet, many citizens have never been able to managably pay for a healthcare plan. Trouble on Wallstreet will hopefully make us reevaluate our spending habits. However, the recession cannot take complete responsibility for the failures of the nation's healthcare system. In this issue of The Indypendent Reader, we take a closer look at public health. Now, more than ever, it is critical to ultimately focus our eyes on population heath. We look to productively analyze the social determinants of health in Baltimore City.

If you are reading this paper,chances are that you reside in Baltimore. This is your population group. Population health is chiefly concerned with the health of individual groups. To go further, population health studies the determinants of a group's health.What we must do is focus our attention on each determinant. What does this determinant mean considering the outcomes rendered to inequality in health across populations? For instance, Baltimore is home to a number of world-renowned medical institutions. Nevertheless, in the shadow of these mega-medical centers, an HIV/AIDS epidemic plagues Baltimore’s poorest communities. In order to define the systematic differences in population heath, we take a look at the absence of these institutions in the fight against HIV/AIDS here at home.

Health Care is a concern for all of us. For supporters of universal health care policy, the long uphill battle has often been plagued by politician supported reform policies that only maintain the nation's exclusory and privatized healthcare structure. Two of our articles explore the possibility of a nonexclusory, full-coverage, single payer healthcare system.While acquiring universal healthcare is doubtlessly at the forefront of the population health battle, there are still many other factors that make a healthy population. Afterall, what are we feeding our children at school? Baltimore is also a city deep in the throes of the influences and consequences of drugs. What does all of this mean? We, The Indypendent Reader, aim to explore all of these issues.

Take a look at our table of contents. It will lead you to your article of choice. Don't hesitate to read the issue from cover-to-cover. Cover-to-cover readings will fill you with excellent news articles, a cheeky cartoon, terrific images and particular pieces that, underneath all the statistics, assess the ethical basis for discussions on population health. Commuity leaders, activists, and journalists put their pens to paper (or rather their fingers to a keyboard) and give us the following discourses. Consider your health, turn the page....

--Nicholas Petr and Corey Reidy for the editors

cover: Teddy Johnson