Media Manifesto, Y. Taguchi

Regulation of Free Expression Manifest, Yoko Taguchi


For long time, people have been held suspicion of information of Television, Newspapers, and SNS run by government, corporations, and individuals. Where does the suspicion come from? It deprives from media’s wrong and manipulative broadcasts without social responsibility. Here, social responsibility denotes the responsibility of broadcasting accurate and fair information. The media do not explicitly violate this responsibility. What hinders their obligation of social responsibility? It is the rights of free expression.

Because of the unregulated rights of free expression, individuals, corporations, and even government announce silly lies, alluring advertisement, and manipulative declaration. That’s the reason why Venezuelan people faced the crisis of dictatorship from anti-Chavez party in 2002. That’s the reason why the curse of annihilation by nuclear contamination frightened people in Japan and all over the world in 2011.

Of course, there is no doubt that nothing can restrict anyone’s freedom of expression.

However, having the rights of free expression does not mean that people are welcomed to voice irrational information. Professor Mark Dinneen alerts that, “all [media] must assume responsibility for what they express, and cannot hide behind anonymity or convey messages that promote war, discrimination or religious intolerance” (38). Then, he continues that, “past experience highlights the need to regulate the conduct of the media more effectively, to improve the quality and accuracy of the information it disseminates, extend public access to and participation in the media and to encourage social responsibility on the part of its owners and employees” (38-39). As Dinneen declares, the right of free expression in media is only guaranteed when they conduct their own social responsibility.

In order to solve this mischief of the rights of free expression, any third party must establish an inspective organization and deploy the inspectors to all media groups. As people who desire getting rid of media suspicion, we need to move the society and to develop the trusting media.

Yoko Taguchi
January 2015, California, U.S.

Media Manifesto, N. Furuta


Unbiased Media Manifesto, Nobuyuki Furuta

Don’t get deceived by mass media. Media are defined as something that mediates between people and this world. In reality, however, that’s not true because media are biased. They have complete power to decide what they broadcast and what citizens are able to know. They manipulate innocent citizens by giving only biased information. The relationship between media and us shouldn’t be one-directional. Media shouldn’t be biased. We, all citizens, have a right to know the truth. We have to change this society that is ruled by the huge influence of mass media.

So, we need something to control media. We demand that the government introduce new laws that guarantee that mass media include different voices in their broadcasts. Laws are the best tool to establish and maintain equality within media and people, since no one is allowed to defy and break them. Can we rely on the government for the role of controlling mass media, instead of introducing new laws? No, because, if the government could control media and decide broadcasts, mass media would be just the tool to convey the opinions of the government. We need absoluteness. Our right to know the reality has to be assured by laws.

Also, broadcasts must always include opinions from different perspectives in order to depict the reality as precisely as possible. Something that is unfavorable for media and the government could often happen in reality. Media have power to keep concealing these facts. However, they have to let all viewers know what is actually happening. Some people might suffer from the unknown facts that media don’t open. Media have to convey their voices as well because that is the role that media have to fill.

Join us and let’s make media unbiased. We have a right to know the truth.

Media Manifesto, K. Tsuji


Manifesto, Kaori Tsuji

Be an Active Participant, Freedom of Expression and Media Literacy

When I was in elementary school, I used to be obsessed with the TV because it showed me things that I have never known. When I was in middle school, I started using a cell phone. It taught me how to connect with other people. When I was in high school, I got a smartphone, which made me get used not to communicate face to face with other people. I am currently in the college and got a laptop. I am on online almost all day. Despite the fact that these devices are getting more and more complicated, they make my life so much more convenient. I do not need a newspaper or a magazine to know recent news or gossips. I do not have to go shopping at stores anymore. I can talk to multiple friends at the same time via the Internet. These devices provide us more free and useful world. I am sure many people feel the same. In the complexity, however, we are being trapped by the misunderstandings of freedom of the media. I would like to assert two fantasies that we are being led to believe.

First, we consider freedom as a state that we can do whatever we want. One of my classmates from my high school put a naked picture of his friend on Twitter without his friend’s permission. As a result, a lot of people who saw the picture felt uncomfortable and even were offended, and the friendship between him and his friend was destroyed. There was also an incident in Japan that a student committed suicide due to the bully on the Internet. The bullies took advantage of the anonymity of the Internet. On New Year’s Eve, a Japanese famous singer made fun of the honor medal that was from the Japanese emperor on TV, and many people found it as an insult to the emperor. Consequently, he had to apologize in public for his attitude. His reputation has been dragged down after that. How far can we have freedom of expression? I believe one’s freedom should be respected as long as it does not invade others’ rights or does not hurt others, and I believe we all should know that. However, the media can make us forget the common fact, because we tend to forget the small screen of a phone or a laptop is connected with millions of other people. These people that I listed above clearly do not know what they did on their screen could have such impact on others’ lives. Through the filter, we feel like we are free from any restriction, which is totally a lie.

Second, as we are witnessing the evolution of technology, we tend to feel that we are free to get any kind of information through the use of media. Although, we definitely have better accessibilities to a variety of information, and it is so much easier than before, just having those skills does not make you more notified. We all get to try to actively take advantage of it. Glen Greenwald criticizes people because they are just satisfied with a feeling of freedom, and not many people actually go access bunch of database and try to collect as much information as they can. Some people might say that it is fine just to have the option so that those who want to know more can gain more information. However, if people do not actively try to get information on the Internet, the authority would fool those people. It has been manipulating information people receive and the impression people receive from it in the history. Its propaganda system was less intricate in the past, but it takes advantage of the complexity of the media in the current society and shows people an illusion of freedom. For example, Greenwald states that the U.S government concealed information and its lies about the Iraq War to justify to go to the war. Greenwald also warns that there is a disparity of information that people receive depending on where they live because the government chooses what to disclose and what not to. Hence, the government of each country has its own subjective purpose underneath its media and tries to control people’s image of their own country or other countries. Due to the authority’s censorship, people could have hostility toward other countries, and it might end up fighting with them, just like the 9.11 attacks. These are the reasons that I want to emphasize the importance of spontaneity searching more information. We cannot allow the authority to deceive us anymore! It is not easy to transform it, so it is we who have to change to protect our freedom!

To prevent us from being trapped by the myths of freedom in the current society, I would like to declare that we all need a certain education about the use of media. I have taken a class about the use of computers. The class gave me knowledge about the history of technology and softwares or applications in the computers, but it never taught me the dangers of the media. The education in the current society must include not only how to use the media, but also ethics on the media so that people would use the Internet in accordance with the morality. Also, it has to be conducted according to universal curriculum so that a country can change to whatever beneficial for the government. In a way, the education can improve the inequality of access to the media, so it has to be mandatory for all students as well. On the top of that, it has to be done for the purpose of making students aware of the system of the media and its positive and negative sides, letting them have the skills to access the information by themselves, and growing them up as active participants of this digital world. As active participants, we all are required to follow ethics in order to protect others’ freedom and our own’s. If we see someone violating the ethics, we would be required to accuse of whoever the opponent. What if the government violates them like it has done so many times around the world in the history? Suppose only a few of us are active participants and accuse the government for hiding information that people should know and taking away people’s freedom to know, they would be marginalized because the government power is stronger. However, if all of us are active participants, we would be able to submerge the government’s corruption, just like a revolution. I believe being active participants means being free in a true sense. Before we lose our sight in the entanglement, it is the time!

Media Manifesto, S. Adams

By Stuart Adams


American news media is a parasite, infecting American political consciousness with sensationalist garbage meant to serve the interests of those in power, and leaving only the shell of journalist integrity for the American people. The average American who wants to learn about what is going on in the world around them cannot do so without constantly working to separate whether or not what they read is the truth, or a fabrication meant to serve the 6 media companies which control 90% of American media.

There is hope that as news media grows on the internet, journalistic plurality can return to American political consciousness. As a media landscape shaped by rules designed to create an equal and meritocratic space, it has opened up debates which have been largely avoided by corporate media and brought issues into the light which have been left in darkness by American news media.

Despite the admirable efforts of these internet journalists, most Americans do not know of them because their primary source of news media is not free from corporate media influence. Television, radio, and print media are primarily continue to control most of American political consciousness and propel our society towards an Orwellian nightmare, drowning out dissenting opinions with testimonials from experts whose only credentials are agreeable political positions, replacing investigation with sensationalism, and refusing to broadcast stories which cast their political allies in a negative light..

We who are aware of this information disparity can no longer sit idly by as millions are pacified by the media-political complex. We have seen what happens when the valiant efforts of numerous privacy groups are brought together in protest of draconian laws like SOPA and CISPA. However, if an increased effort is not made towards protecting free media and a dramatic shift is not made in the minds of concerned Americans, American politicians will continue to make attacks on free media until the march toward corporate censorship is complete.

The time has come for the fight for media access rights to go on the offensive. The orgy of deregulation which has continued since the Ronald Reagan administration must be reversed. The cross-medium conglomerates have become so large that they are now a destructive force facing American democracy. Had this system existed during early America, and foundational documents been passed under the scrutinizing eye of the British Empire, would widely know works of American political commentary like Common Sense have been widely circulated? Not likely.

The internet is a force which is frightening to those in power, a medium which by the virtue of its creator was made free and equal to all those which broadcast on it and because of that, it must be protected. The internet has elicited reactions from repressive governments all over the world, with Russia jailing bloggers, China maintaining nationwide internet censorship, and the United States persecuting those who use it to publish evidence of US crimes. However, the internet is of course consistently under attack, most recently by “regulators” who wanted to rewrite the rules of net neutrality which allowed the internet to be a free space in the first place. In order to protect the internet, we need to reclassify it as a common carrier, so that ISPs will never be able to give preference to certain kinds of internet traffic.

We know that the public would not willingly allow themselves to be fooled and have the integrity of their democracy pulled away from beneath their feet. To create a public of active agents in media representation, we have to educate the people in the methods by which media outlets set political agenda and stifle dissenting voices. The people must be shown that they have the power, both as a member of a democratic society and as a consumer, to make decisions which will put pressure on the media to be a check to government power, and not a collaborator with it. If the desire for reform is kept solely within the heart of the reformer, then those reforms will not outlive the reformer. But if the flame of reform is passed from person to person and shared widely, then we will constantly move towards a more equal society.

Counterpunch

Death by Ten Billion Status Updates

How Facebook Killed the Internet

by DAVID ROVICS
Facebook killed the internet, and I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people didn’t even notice.
I can see the look on many of your faces, and hear the thoughts. Someone’s complaining about Facebook again.  Yes, I know it’s a massive corporation, but it’s the platform we’re all using.  It’s like complaining about Starbucks.  After all the independent cafes have been driven out of town and you’re an espresso addict, what to do?  What do you mean “killed”?  What was killed?
to read the rest of this article go to:

Indigenous Communities



International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs

http://www.iwgia.org/

Wichis

http://www.survivalinternational.org/tribes/wichi

http://saiic.nativeweb.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wich%C3%AD_people

http://www.survivalinternational.org/tribes/wichi

Mapuches

http://mapuexpress.org/

http://www.mapuche.nl/

https://www.youtube.com/user/folilmapuche/videos

https://mapuchenl.wordpress.com/

http://radio.mapuche.nl/​

Bolivia
Agencia Plurinacional de Comunicación

Zapatistas

Official Website: http://www.ezln.org.mx/

Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Zapatista-Movement/183219555104702

Documentary, “A Place Called Chiapas”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TffwElt_UU

Indigenous Communities and Media

Navajos make their own films



In the summer of 1966, seven Navajo community members from Pine Springs, Arizona, were the subjects of one of the most provocative experiments in cognitive and visual anthropology yet completed, the Navajo Film Project,resulting in Sol Worth and John Adair’s seminal work
Through Navajo Eyes, as well as seven short films produced by Navajo filmmakers that garnered worldwide attention in their own right. In 2011, the films were repaired and returned to the Navajo Nation for public screenings, the first step in a process of repatriation and resignification that mirrors the repatriation of other visual media to Navajo and indigenous communities. The return of the films offersa unique opportunity to reexamine the meanings of the films and the project itself, reframing the discussion around issues of visual sovereignty, community reengagements, and “reclaiming” Diné/Navajo histories

Leighton C. Peterson.

The Kayapo

The Kayapó (Disappearing World Series) Producer: Michael Beckham; Director: Michael Beckham; Camera: Michael Blakeley; Sound: David Woods; Editor: Paul Griffiths‐Davies; Consultant Anthropologist: Terence Turner; Distributor: Enquiries to Granada Television International, 1987, 52 min.


Course Bibliography

Atton, C. (2008). Alternative Media Theory and Journalism Practice. In Digital Media and Democracy Tactics in Hard Times (pp. 213-227). Massachusetts: The MIT Press Cambridge.

Barnett, C. (2003). Introduction: How is democracy? In Culture and Democracy Media, Space, and Representation (pp. 1-8). Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.

Barnett, C. (2003). The Production of Communicative Spaces: Formations of the Public. In Culture and Democracy Media, Space, and Representation (pp. 33-53). Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.

Barnett, C. (2003). Technologies of Citizenship: Assembling Media Publics. In Culture and Democracy Media, Space, and Representation (pp. 81-107). Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.

Boler, M. (2008). Democracy on the Airwaves: An Interview with Amy Goodman. In M. Boler (Ed.), Digital Media and Democracy Tactics in Hard Times (pp. 197-212). Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Boler, M. (2008). Introduction. In M. Boler (Ed.), Digital Media and Democracy Tactics in Hard Times (pp. 37-50). Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Boler, M., & Turpin, S. (2008). The Daily Show and Crossfire: Satire and Sincerity as Truth to Power. In M. Boler (Ed.), Digital Media and Democracy Tactics in Hard Times(pp. 383-403). Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Buckman, R. (1996). Birth, Death, and Resurrection of Press Freedom in Chile. In R. Cole (Ed.), Communication in Latin America Journalism, Mass Media, and Society (pp. 155-181). Ailmington: Scholarly Resources.

Canizalez, A., & Lugo-Ocando, J. (2008). BBeyond National Media Systems: A medium for Latin America and the Struggle for Integration. In The Media in Latin America. (pp. 209-225). Open University Press.

Castells, M. (2012). Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge: Polity.

Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. (2009). Shaping E-Democracy. In The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice and Policy (1st ed., pp. 139-165). Cambridge University Press.

Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. (2009). From Indirect to Direct Representation. In The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice and Policy (1st ed., pp. 68-89). Cambridge University Press.

Croteau, D., & Hoyens, W. (2001). The New Media Giants Changing Industry Structure. In The Business of Media Corporate Media and the Public Interest (pp. 71-107). Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.

Curran, J. (n.d.). Rethinking the Media as a Public Sphere. In P. Dahlgran & C. Sparks (Eds.), Communication and Citizenship Journalism and the Public Sphere (pp. 27-57). Routledge.

Curran, J. (2011). Introduction. In Media and Democracy (pp. 1-6). New York: Routledge.

Curran, J. (2011). Questioning a New Orthodoxy. In Media and Democracy (pp. 28-46). New York: Routledge.

Curran, J., Iyengar, S., Lund, A., & Salovaara-Moring, I. (2011). Media System, Public Knowledge and Democracy: A Comparative Study. In Media and Democracy (pp. 47-60). New York: Routledge.

Debord, G. (1983). Society of the Spectacle. Detriot: Black & Red.

De La Torre, C. (1992). The Ambiguous Meanings of Latin American Populisms. Social Research, 59(2), 385-414.

Deuze, M. (2011). Media Life. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media Perspectives for the 21st Century (pp. 137-148). Routledge.

Diez, C. (2015, January 20). Venimos de una hegemonia de la imagen. Retrieved January 20, 2015, from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/suplementos/espectaculos/17-34518-2015-01-20.html

Dinneen, M. (2012). The Chavez Government and the Battle Over the Media in Venezuela. Asian Journal of Latin American Studies, 25(2), 27-53. Retrieved January, 2015.

Dornfeld, B., & Larkin, B. (2002). Putting American Public Television Documentary in Its Places. In F. Ginsburg & L. Abu-Lughod (Eds.), Media Worlds Anthropology on New Terrain (pp. 247-263). University of California Press.

Downing, J., Ford, T., Gil, G., & Stein, L. (2000). Social Movements, the Public Sphere, Networks. In Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social (pp. 23-37). Sage Publications.

Downing, J., Ford, T., Gil, G., & Stein, L. (2000). Community, Democracy, Dialogue, and Radical Media. In Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social (pp. 38-55). Sage Publications.

Downing, J., Ford, T., Gil, G., & Stein, L. (2000). Art, Aesthetics, Radical Media, and Communication. In Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social (pp. 56-66). Sage Publications.

Downing, J., Ford, T., Gil, G., & Stein, L. (2000). Radical Media Organization: Two Models. In Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social (pp. 67-74). Sage Publications.

Durham, G.M., Kellner, M. D. (2001). Media and Cultural Studies: KeyWorks. Oxford: Blackwell.

Ford, T., & Gil, G. (2000). Radical Internet Use. In Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social (pp. 201-234). Carbondale: Sage Publications.


Fox, E. (1988). Introduction. In Dias de Bail: El fracaso ded la Reforma en la Television de America Latin (pp. 9-16). Paris: Felefacs.

Fox, E. (1988). La Reforma de la television chilena. In Dias de Bail: El fracaso ded la Reforma en la Television de America Latin (pp. 103-121). Paris: Felefacs.


Fox, E. (1988). Antecedentes de la reforma. In Dias de Bail: El fracaso ded la Reforma en la Television de America Latin (pp. 17-53). Paris: Felefacs.

Fox, J. (1998). The Difficult Transition from Clientelism to Citizenship: Lessons from Mexico. In D. Chalmers, C. Vilas, K. Hite, S. Martin, K. Piester, & M. Segarra (Eds.), The New Politics of Inequality in Latin America Rethinking Participation and Representation (Vol. 391-420). New York: Oxford University Press.

Freire, P. (2013). Society in Transition. In Education for Critical Consciousness (Reprint Edition ed., pp. 3-18). Bloomsbury Academic.

Fromson, M. (1996). Mexico’s Struggle for a Free Press. In R. Cole (Ed.), Communication in Latin America Journalism, Mass Media, and Society (pp. 115-137). Ailmington: Scholarly Resources.

Ginsburg, F., Abu-Lughod, L., & Larkin, B. (2002). Introduction. In Media Worlds Anthropology on New Terrain (pp. 1-36). University of California Press.

Gonzalez-Rodriguez, G., & Lugo-Ocando, J. (2008). The Media in Chile: The Restoration of Democracy and the Subsequent Concentration of Media Ownership. In The Media in Latin America (pp. 61-77). Open University Press.

Greenwald, G. (2010). Limiting Democracy: The American Media’s World View, and Ours.Social Research, 77(3), 827-838.

Greenwald, G. (2014). No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, The NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Guedas-Bailey, O., & Jambeiro Barbosa, O. (2008). The Media in Brazil: An Historical Overview of Brazilian Broadcasting Politics. In J. Lugo-Ocando (Ed.), The Media in Latin America.(pp. 46-60). Open University Press.

Gurevitch, M., Coleman, S., Blumler, J., & Graber, D. (2011). Political Communication: Old and New Media Relationships. In Media Power In Politics (Sixth Edition ed., pp. 45-56). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.

Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. SAGE. London.

Hargittai, E. (2011). Minding the digital gap: Why understandings digital inequality matters. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media Perspectives for the 21st Century (pp. 231-240). Routledge.

Hindman, M. (2009). The Internet and the “Democratization” of Politics. In The Myth of Digital Democracy (pp. 1-19). Princeton University Press.

Hindman, M. (2009). “Googlearchy”: The Link Structure of Political Web Sites. In The Myth of Digital Democracy (pp. 38-57). Princeton University Press.

Hindman, M. (2009). Political Traffic and the Politics of Search. In The Myth of Digital Democracy (pp. 58-81). Princeton University Press.

Hoover, S., & Emerich, M. (2011). Introduction: Media, Spiritualities and Social Change. In Media, Spiritualities and Social Change (pp. 1-12). London: Continuum.

Hughes, S., & Lugo-Ocando, J. (2008). The Media in Mexico: From Authoritarians to Hybrid System. In The Media in Latin America. (pp. 131-149). Open University Press.

Johansson, T., & Rosengran, K. (1994). Late modernity, consumer culture and lifestyles: Toward a cognitive-affective theory. In Media effects and beyond: Culture, socialization and lifestyles (pp. 265-293). New York: Routledge.

Landau, S., & Hayden, T. (2002). The Zapatista Army of National Liberation Part of the Latin Americn Revolutionary Tradition– But also very Different. In The Zapatista Reader (pp. 146-152). New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press.

Levitsky, S., & Mainwaring, S. (2005). Argentina: Democratic Survival amidst Economic Failure. In F. Hagopian (Ed.), The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America Advances and Setbacks (pp. 63-89). Cambridge University Press.

Lopes, I. (2013). Political Culture and the Democratization of Communications in Brazil. Latin American Perspectives, 40 No. 3(190), 129-140.

Mainwaring, S., & Mainwaring, F. (2005). Introduction. In The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America Advances and Setbacks (pp. 1-13). Cambridge University Press.

Mainwaring, S., Perez-Linan, A., & Mainwaring, S. (2005). Latin American Democratization since 1978: Democratic Transitions, Breakdowns, and Erosions. In F. Hagopian (Ed.), The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America Advances and Setbacks (pp. 14-59). Cambridge University Press.

McAllister, M. (2011). Consumer culture and new media: Commodity fetishism in the digital era. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media Perspectives for the 21st Century (pp. 149-165). Routledge.

McChesney, R. (2004). The Age of Hyper-Commercialism. In The Problem of the Media (pp. 138-174). New York: Monthly Review Press.

Meikle, G. (2008). Whacking Bush. In M. Boler (Ed.), Digital Media and Democracy Tactics in Hard Times (pp. 371-382). Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Mellado, C., & Lagos, C. (2013). Redefining Comparative Analyses of Media Systems from the Perspective of New Democracies. Communication & Society, 26(4), 1-24.

Montgomery, L., & Cole, R. (1996). The Role of Women in Latin American Mass Media. In Communication in Latin America Journalism, Mass Media, and Society (pp. 37-49). Ailmington: Scholarly Resources.

Murphy, P. (2007). Introduction Media and Democracy in the Age of Globalization. In I. Blankson & P. Murphy (Eds.), Negotiating Democracy Media Transformations in Emerging Democracies (pp. 1-11). State University of New York Press.

Navarro, L. (2002). Mexico’s Secret War. In T. Hayden (Ed.), The Zapatista Reader (pp. 61-68). Thunder’s Mouth Press.

Nichols, J. (1996). Effects of International Propaganda on U.S.-Cuban Relations. In R. Cole (Ed.), Communication in Latin America Journalism, Mass Media, and Society (pp. 71-103). Ailmington: Scholarly Resources.

Nichols, J., & McChesney, R. (2013, November 6). Free the Media! Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article.177033/free-media

Nichols, J., & McChesney, R. (2008, May 29). Who’ll Unplug Big Media? Stay Tuned. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article/wholl-unplug-big-media-stay-tuned#

Palavicini, G. (2011). Mass Media’s Influence on the Transformation of the Mexican Political Regime. Latin America Policy, 2(2), 234-246.

Papathanassopoulos, S. (2011). Introduction: Media perspectives for the 21st century. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media Perspectives for the 21st Century (pp. 1-17). Routledge.

Paz, O. (2002). The Media Spectacle Comes to Mexico. In T. Hayden (Ed.), The Zapatista Reader (pp. 30-33). Thunder’s Mouth Press.

Pingree, S., & Hawkins, R. (1994). Looking for Patterns in Lifestyle Behaviours. In K. Rosengran (Ed.), Media effects and beyond: Culture, socialization and lifestyles (pp. 76-96). New York: Routledge.

Poniatowska, E. (2002). Voices from the Jungle Subcomandante Marcos and Culture. In T. Hayden (Ed.), The Zapatista Reader (pp. 373-381). Thunder’s Mouth Press.

Relly, J., & Gonzalez de Bustamante, C. (2013). Silencing Mexico: A Study of Influences on Journalists in the Northern States. The International Journal of Press/ Politics, Sage Publications, Inc.-Sage Publications, Inc.

Rockwell, R. (2007). Vestiges of Authoritarianism Monopoly Broadcasting in Central America. In I. Blankson & P. Murphy (Eds.), Negotiating Democracy Media Transformations in Emerging Democracies (pp. 35-50). New York: State University of New York Press.

Santos, B. (2014). Manifesto for Good Living/ Buen Vivir AND Minifesto for Intellectual-Activists. In Epistemologies of the South Justice against Epistemicide (pp. 2-17). Paradigm.

Santos, B. (2014). Introduction Creating a Distance in Relation to Western-centric Political Imagination and Critical Theory. In Epistemologies of the South Justice against Epistemicide (pp. 19-46). Paradigm.

Schimmel, S. (2011). The Blogosphere of Resistance: Anonymous Blogging as a Safe Haven for Chellenging Religious Authority and Creating Dissident Communities. In Media, Spiritualities and Social Change (pp. 147-157). London: Continuum.

Selb, P., & Graber, D. (2011). The Al Jazeera Effect: How the New Global Media are Reshaping World Politics. In Media Power In Politics(Sixth ed., pp. 283-291). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.

Selverston, M. (1998). The Politics of Identity Reconstruction: Indians and Democracy in Ecuador. In D. Chalmers, C. Vilas, K. Hite, S. Martin, K. Piester, & M. Segarra (Eds.), The New Politics of Inequality in Latin America Rethinking Participation and Representation (pp. 170-191). New York: Oxford University Press.

Sinclair, J. (1999). Introduction. In Latin American Television: A Global View (pp. 1-32). Oxford University Press.

Sinclair, J. (1999). The Autumn of the Patriarch: Mexico and Televisa. In Latin American Television: A Global View (pp. 33-62). Oxford University Press.

Sinclair, J. (1999). The Latin American Continent: Brazil, Venezuela, and Argentina. In Latin American Television: A Global View (pp. 63-91). Oxford University Press.

Sitrin, M. (2012). Horizontalidad. In Everyday Revolutions: Horizontalism and Autonomy in Argentina (pp. 61-82). Zed Books.

Sitrin, M. (2012). New subjectives and Affective Politics. In EVERYDAY REVOLUTIONS Horizontalism and Autonomy in Argentina (pp. 83-100). Zed Books.

Sturken, M., Thomas, D., J. Ball-Rokeach S. (2004). Technological Visions: The Hopes and Fears That Shape New Technologies. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.  

Sutton, B. (2008). Contesting Racism: Democratic Citizenship, Human Rights, and Antiracist Politics in Argentina. Latin American Perspectives, 35(6), 106-121. Retrieved from JSTOR.

Swartz, A. (2008, July 1). Guerilla Open Access Manifesto. Retrieved January 1, 2015, from

Tufekci, Z. (2014). Social Movements and Governments in the Digital Age: Evaluating a Complex Landscape. Journal of International Affairs, 68(1), 1-18.

Turner, T. (2002). Representation, Politics, and Cultural Imagination in Indigenous Video. In F. Ginsburg, L. Abu-Lughod, & B. Larkin (Eds.), Media Worlds Anthropology on New Terrain (pp. 75-89). University of California Press.

Micklethwait, J. (Ed.). (2014, November 29). Everybody wants to rule the world. The Economist, 19-22.

Micklethwait, J. (Ed.). (2014, November 8). How high can it fly? The Economist, 63-64.

Micklethwait, J. (Ed.). (2014, November 18). The future of magic. The Economist, 157-157.

Vialey, P., Belinche, M., & Tovar, C. (2008). The Media in Argentina:Democracy, Crisis and the Reconfiguration of Media Groups. In J. Lugo-Ocando (Ed.), The Media in Latin America (pp. 13-27). Open University Press.

Webster, F., & Papathanassopoulos, S. (2011). Information and democracy: The weakening of social democracy. In Media Perspectives for the 21st Century (pp. 22-40). Routledge.

Wilkinson, K. (2011). Democracy Sponsored by Nafta? Mexican Television in the Free Trade Era. In I. Blankson & P. Murphy (Eds.), Negotiating Democracy Media Transformations in Emerging Democracies (pp. 199-218). New York: State University of New York Press.

Williams, B., & Carpini, M. (2011). 9/11 and Its Aftermath. In After Broadcast News: Media Regimes, Democracy, and the New Information Environment (pp. 222-277). Cambridge University Press.

Williams, B., & Carpini, M. (2011). Shaping a New Media Regime. In After Broadcast News: Media Regimes, Democracy, and the New Information Environment (pp. 278-326). Cambridge University Press.

Williams, R. (1974). Television: Technology and Cultural Form. London: Routledge.

Wroe, A. (2014, November 18). Farewell to escapism (J. Micklethwait, Ed.). The Economist, 158-158.


Vodovnik, Z. (2004). !Ya Basta! Ten Years of the Zapatista Uprising. Oakland: AK Press.