--- Chuck <chuck at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> It would be much smarter to sink resources into
> putting labor-oriented
> media into current media. Starting up a labor
> equivalent to the WSJ is
> the 1930 answer to our 21st century needs.
Then how come that the pro-labor _The Guardian_ is one of the most resepcted newspapers on the other side of the pond? France, Germany, Italy etc. have their pro-labor papers too, no?
Saturating mainstream media with pro-labor contents is fine but there is one pesky thing - ownership control.
Do you really think that the Murdochs& Co. would allow serious pro-labor contents in the media they own?
I also do not quite understand why you assume that pro-labor paper would be mostly boring "shop-floor" talk. It does not have to - The Guardian covers the same variety of topics as any other serious paper, but without the pro-business, anti-labor edge.
I tend to agree with your assessement that liberal and labor leaders are stuck in the past, or perhaps as have their heads stuck up their arses (and often their bosses' as well) - but that strategy is visibly loosing grounds and will have to change sooner rather than later.
I think it would be a good use of resources such as this one to develop a comprehensive pro-labor strategy of influencing public opinion. I mean not just talking what needs to be done but above all identifying existing institutions - unions, think tanks, foundations, civic associations, businesses (especially coops) even religious organizations and developing a network that would allow them to cooperate closely and coordinate thier efforts - just as the right wingers are now doing. Having a dedicated media outlet controlled by pro-labor interest seems like an essential element of such an effort.
Wojtek
__________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com