Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Echo Chamber, Echo Chamber, Echo Chamber

By Don Hazen, AlterNet. Posted January 23, 2006.


AlterNet's newest blog aims to spread the best ideas of the progressive community far and wide.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Don Hazen

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Today AlterNet launches a new blog, Echo Chamber, that will cover how progressive ideas and issues are communicated and gain traction in the overall media universe. We'll be looking closely at language and framing, and media initiatives and ads like Moveon.org's much-needed campaign against corruption in Washington, D.C. We will also spotlight progressive media figures, events, new books and films, and happenings in the blogosphere.

Several AlterNet editors will be blogging, as well as Jeffrey Feldman of Frameshop and Paul Waldman, a Media Matters for America fellow and original editor of the Gadflyer.

You may wonder: What is an "echo chamber"? It's a term that gets bandied about, usually along the lines of, "We progressives need a better echo chamber like the radical right has, what with Fox, Limbaugh, Drudge, etc."

With an effective echo chamber, a political idea or message, preferably one with clear values and goals, is repeated frequently in various media by multiple message carriers until it reaches a tipping point or helps achieve a political goal, or becomes part of the overall national political conversation.

Take the ongoing campaign against Wal-Mart that has raised public consciousness about the company's many transgressions. It is hard to ignore the fact the Wal-Mart's public image has taken a beating in the press; as a result, the company has had to change some of its policies and respond with some positive steps.

There has been solid reporting and grassroots organizing against Wal-Mart for some time. However, it was the making of Robert Greenwald's film, Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, that served as a catalyst for the most recent stage of the campaign that has put Wal-Mart on the defensive. [Full disclosure: Robert Greenwald is a member of the board of the Independent Media Institute, AlterNet's parent organization.] Grassroots activism, an aggressive web presence, good visibility in the blogosphere, coverage on AlterNet, the Nation, CAP's Progress Report and other progressive media all helped create an environment in which the corporate press began to cover Wal-Mart more critically.

Greenwald also understood the importance of good corporate media coverage. He hired PR guru Ken Sunshine, who works with both unions and Hollywood celebrities. Sunshine and his team helped place key early articles in the New York Times, Business Week and other media to build the momentum. Greenwald did countless interviews, pounding away at the theme that Wal-Mart is destroying communities and shirking its responsibilities to pay a fair wage, provide health care, etc. With the development of Wal-Mart-Watch.com and WakeUpWal-Mart.com and the leaking of internal company memos, the media echo chamber became a key element of a strategic campaign.

But an echo chamber cannot succeed without the necessary ingredients: vision, ideas, values, language, organizing in the field, clear goals, effective spokespeople and the commitment of the full range of progressive media to pound away to help push the mainstream coverage.

And we aren't just trying to emulate the top-down infrastructure that the radical right has developed over the years. Our echo chamber here at AlterNet will give voice not only to policy wonks and strategists, but also to the grassroots progressive activists who too often lack a forum in which to air their ideas and innovations.


Digg!

Don Hazen is the executive editor of AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
logos
Posted by: logos on Jan 23, 2006 2:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The form of the question dictates the form of the answer. Please, ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS. If you do I will e-mail until my fingers are bloody.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Requirements of Framing
Posted by: drone on Jan 23, 2006 7:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Hazen hits the nail on the head towards the end of his piece, when he suggests that framing is quite a bit more than just propagandizing effectively.

My consistent knock as a poster on this site is that people who call themselves progressives have absolutely no idea what that actually may mean, or, worse, take it to mean whatever they want it to in any given context.

Americans center and left face a deficit not of framing as much as understanding. Ideological coherence is virtually absent from the blogosphere, with some very notable exceptions, including one or two on Alternet (tip of the hat to Holland). The people of the US, even those great of intention and good of heart, have little to no knowledge of political thought, meaning that their understanding of the options available to progressives is severely limited.

Framing is important, true, but a larger progressive movement requires that another step be made first: political education. Learning the stuff that wasn't taught to you in primary schools, television, radio, and popular literature. It means rolling up the sleeves and engaging in the hardwork of our movement forebears, who understood very clearly that victories for social justice required a fairly well-informed membership, people who understood their -isms in rational terms, and a membership that could discuss these thoughts coherently with others in order to spread a particular message.

Without doing this most basic of things, all you're doing is engaging in an exercise of restating the bullet points of the already powerful and enfranchised of the Democratic party elite.

Please consider making a strong effort to run a parallel log on political and social education that can give readers a chance to learn what is currently the exclusive province of social science grad students and ambitious laypersons. Start a blog on the various factions that could be called progressives, and what their beliefs and ideologies are about, as well as relevant historical narratives about each one. What would be nicest of all is if we could not have to use this empty label of "progressive" to describe what it is we don't know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: equirements of Framing Posted by: JoshuaHolland
hello? hello?
Posted by: liberalibrarian on Jan 23, 2006 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is anybody out there? Yes, they are out there (in the echo chamber) and I'm glad to hear about the new blog theme. As a librarian I work with words, information and its context every day. So much of the so-called ignorance of the American people, I am convinced is due to the innundation of right wing disinformation and sensationalism.

This needs to change and change quickly if we are to survive as a free people with any economic equality and integrity at all. Progressiv-ism, liberalism, etc.. are ideas whose time has come. In the words of Victor Hugo--there is no army that can match that.

Go, Alternet

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I question
Posted by: Michelle on Jan 23, 2006 11:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I question whether the U.S. "progressive" movement -- dominated as it is by white-centered organizations and a white-European cultural perspective -- is really competent or responsible enough to be setting the terms for language, framing or anything about reality.

I wonder if any of the white progressive leaders involved in this even bothers to think about this kind of thing as they step again to the front, frame and reframe, and assume that they are the ones who should be the definers and in the lead in a movement for change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I question Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: I question Posted by: la beluga
Heroes and Heroines in the media
Posted by: Allan Shore on Jan 23, 2006 11:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jack Ryan, Jason Bourne and lesser-known heroes and a few heroines of contemporary literature (and the movies that follow) are the only "living" examples of cutlural icons striving to save the world from the evil or warped aspects of political domination or greed. Is it any wonder that people have no idea how community collaboration, youth networks, web pod groups, even interactive game technologies can make for realistic strategies for actually making the world a better place?

I have been beating myself up trying to sell books and movie ideas about this and continuously find that this "interesting ideas" don't fit into the mindset of profit-oriented mass marketers. If we can't even go to a movie to eat environmentally friendly popcorn and watch advocates in action for fun and learning, how can we possible expect other generations to do any better?

We can't! And they don't.

Thanks for the Echo Chamber. At least I now know that my message will have a longer life than the time it takes for my screams to go unnoticed.

Allan Shore
epower.ventures@hotmail.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Heroes and Heroines in the media Posted by: drricklippin
I have seen the enemy and it is us
Posted by: YogiBear on Jan 23, 2006 12:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What is this, a "Talking Points" for the left? Some may think that it's lacking, but I think the "one voice" idea is what so many peoplle dislike about the GOP.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where is OUR simple answer
Posted by: Edward George on Jan 23, 2006 12:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Something doesn't have to be correct to be believed but people must both believe and understand something to put it into practice. It seems to me that there are two parts of the "conservative" philosophy, both are quick and easy to understand and together they take care of everything. One part is that God is all knowing and all powerful and in the Bible He tells us how we must behave to go to heaven. The other is that, per Adam Smith, if people save money and invest it in business, the businesses will supply jobs, people will have money to buy the things they want and everybody will thrive (and so will their country) on earth. Thus anyone who constantly quotes the bible or constantly defends and supports business is always right and the stronger and louder they do these things the more right they are. Do progressives (democrats or liberals) have an equivalent simple to understand answer to everything?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Citizen
Posted by: Snott on Jan 23, 2006 1:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that every opportunity we can take to help articulate issues, strategies, and encouragement should be explored, so I welcome the "echo chamber." Here in Olympia, WA, we're developing a network of loosely affiliated "progressive" voices who are determined to stay in the public consciousness/conscience. Believe me, there is a lot of diversity in terms of where they're coming from - though we struggle with diversity in terms of race, culture, and even age. As mentioned elsewhere, "economic availability" is an issue. (the Welfare Rights Organizing Committee, however, is very active hereabouts and participates in the progressive forum.) The discussion of "framing" is challenging, and there are ongoing workshops and discussion groups that are working to develop more effective communications. Only when we truly open communications, can the data begin to take effect. Thank you all for your work and concerns. I'd also like, specifically, to thank librarians, who are increasingly taking strong positions to protect some of our most precious rights. These people are courageous patriots! And, incidentally, it's not enough to just echo, we must also amplify and generate dialog and ideas and be catalysts to realize the visions we dream.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Citizen Posted by: Edward George
» Hey neighbor!! Posted by: Loopylafae
» RE: Citizen Posted by: Snott
Basic choice: a special interest group? a general interest group?
Posted by: Sojourner on Jan 23, 2006 2:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The difference is whether you are working to benefit the members of your group primarily or whether what you want is in everyone's general interest. The AMA, for instance, will claim that they are working for the improvement of healthcare for all Americans. But their first priority is the medical profession. Yes, better doctors are in everyone's interest, unless you're into homeopathy or chiropractic.

The ACLU's support of the Bill of Rights benefits everyone, because other people's freedom is in my interest as well as theirs. When you see how hard it is to get folks to understand that, you can see why general interest groups always struggle.

Is the progressive movement, then, working for tactical gains against the overwhelming class warfare underway in the US? It's not that we don't need those. Ours is a time to survive, and politics is about getting things done.

Or is the progressive movement working to support the various general interest groups? Education, for instance, is in everyone's interest.

Contrary to one remark upthread, being politically correct is not necessarily in everyone's interest, whereas self-knowledge, recognizing one's own tastes in political correctness, is in everyone's interest.

So the choice is there. No, it is not always clear. Will progressives be a special interest or a general interest movement? Do we really need more special interests?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I hope this isn't too simplistic ...
Posted by: Loopylafae on Jan 23, 2006 5:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
regarding "framing", could not the issue of "Corporatocracy" be the main ( simplified ?) umbrella under which most of the "leftist" issues would be covered?? It's the corporatocracy which lobbies & bribes the gop in exchange for favours ( so that they can profit more mightily ), & seeks to eradicate worker's rights, minimum wages & environmental controls ( again, as always, to increase their profit margins ) --I would even argue that the war --by which many large corporations profit --many of whom are associates of the current administration, was created for their benefit?? ( ie: raping & pillaging other countries is bound to create terrorism, as the "not-rich" peoples of those regions have no other avenue for redress) ...in virtually every area of injustice & harm that I see in the world, I see corporate profit-mongering behind it!! Is this too simplistic?? Or perhaps I misunderstood the "framing" question??? ...anywhoo, kudo's on the creation of the echo chamber & indeed, of alternet ...finding progressive voices in the blogosphere is what allows me to face the future with at least a small bit of hope!! bless you & namaste, gisele

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Echo Chamber: Lefty Good 'ole Boys vs Righty Good 'ole Boys
Posted by: AlexCathy on Jan 23, 2006 7:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is my definition of an "Echo Chamber":

Conservative "Good 'ole Boys" attack by saying something over and over.

Liberal "Good 'ole Boys" defend by saying the same rebuttal over and over.

Progressives don't need an "Echo Chamber." We need a process for getting new voices with new ideas into the mix. Frankly, I'm tired of reading 1,000 variations of "Bush lied" and "If we could only take the money we're spending in Iraq and spend it on education ... "

All our "Leaders" care about is the Great Game in Washington. Consider your Wal-Mart example. Where were the issues of low-income women at Wal-Mart discussed during the "debate" over Sammy Alito? Say "women's rights" and all the elite want to talk about is Abortion.

Take civil rights. I am an African-American and I don't want to read Earl Ofari Hutchinson, even though he may be your token "black progressive." Mr. Hutchinson is an apologist for the cronyism and corruption of the Los Angeles Democratic Party Machine that's part of the problem. For example, in L.A. the story about the Martin Luther King/Drew Medical Center is one of the greatest urban scandals of our time. But Hutchinson's only concern is some old Demo hacks who look like him might lose power to some progressives who only look a little bit like him.

I live in California's Silicon Valley. Santa Clara County lost 200,000 jobs in the big bust. It's an issue that's not even on the radar screen. Unbelievable!

In California the Democrats and the Republicans have gotten together and agreed to gerrymander all congressional and state legislative districts so the 2006 elections will be almost completely meaningless. Where can I get information to expose and fight that?

You say you don't want a "Top-Down" Echo Chamber. I'll believe it when a "nobody" like me gets a real chance to participate and not just echo what the Good 'ole Boys at the top deem to be the "progressive" agenda.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kevinc
Posted by: kevinc on Jan 24, 2006 9:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I welcome the discourse, but I doubt the outcome.
Not because of commitment or other obvious aspects the bloggers here are well intentioned with.
I saw some great comments on the corporate culture and the local flair for issues which I think are more relevent.
Everything, and I mean everything, is about money. Trying to sound off against the "corporate structure" is doomed for failure because people at the basest level want ... MONEY.
You can't say "well Big Oil" is making huge profits while the elderly are freezing to death and expect it to really make a dent in the collective thinking of Americans. It sounds good, but then the people, who on the outset are against "Big Oil", check the 401K and see they are invested too. So there goes that potential. I could go on and on, but the end result is the same.
Sure we could try to make some resonance with 43 regime and the lies, but the end result wont change the GOP hold on todays politics.
From my view, people can relate, at least emotionally, to the ideals set forth by the GOP (even though it is a farce to people who search for the truth) about less government, stronger "trickle down" economics, stronger corporate profits, and oh yeah, something about the enviournment as long as it doesnt really effect the aformentioned. And this bill of goods is bought because people want to believe they are upper middle class or have a chance at becoming - god forbid -"elite" and that they share these core beliefs with the GOP. They shy away from stronger devisiveness issues like abortion, womens rights, gay marrage, marijuana - at least in public though they would all keep saying it doesn't really affect me, but I have a friend... .So they would support the issue alone, but not when bunched together with taxes or "choose canidate X because he will clean up government". In that case, they will choose a canidate for broad issues and willingly concede defeat to the other stuff. I think polls show this attitude. If everything could be voted on as a seperate item, we would see drastic changes.
So (back to the original idea) I like this concept and hope it can bring some clarity to the Dem's vision, but I think in the end what we want is to be like "them" only different.
Please let me know how I can help.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

maybe it's too broke to fix
Posted by: la beluga on Jan 24, 2006 11:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Basically, we have a socio-economic system based on macro-parasites, such as bureaucrats, warriors and politicians, using up the work and wealth of the human population, and driving the destruction of mountains , forests, seas, rivers and plains for an abstract goal...the bottom line.
I don't think 'progressives' have found a way to another paradigm.
organic is good, anti-nuke is good. renewable energy is good.
Who wants these or cares, as long as they have a job, a house, a microwave an i-pod and computer, a car, food and television to distract them?
We are killing the oceans and just about out of fresh water for most human settlements, but people are calculating profits, and hoping the deluge (or better said the drought and famine) is after their time. maybe it is. Tragedy of the commons to the max.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally!
Posted by: zeitgeist1979 on Jan 25, 2006 10:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you! Finally a follow-up and a review of last year's plan to create an echo chamber to "frame" and impact the national public policy debate. Also, I'm please to see that finally we are recognizing victories, instead of putting ourselves down, running like chickens with our heads cut-off. Finally, I'm glad to see that the concept of "framing" is being defended. I mean I read myself the dismissive comments that "framing" was "superficial" I mean I gotta say those comments were just moronic. Nobody claimed that "framing" should be an end to the means. Progressives are NOT stupid, "framing" is just another tool that can be used wisely at our disposal. Do NOT underestimate the progressive movement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

solution
Posted by: mainstream on Feb 16, 2006 6:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Echo Chamber my progressive, indignant ...

I wrote to leading progressives with a compelling proposal for a far more effective strategy for taking progressive journalism mainstream.

www.GuestEditorials.com
www.InvestigativeNews.com

None of them answered. I let the domain names expire.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]