People’s Tech: Eye-Opening and Inspiring

By Lauren Jansen

Lauren is a junior at the University of Minnesota studying Journalism, Mass Communications, Studies in Cinema and Media Culture, and New Media Studies, and is currently a media justice intern with Main Street Project.

What is media justice?  Why does it matter?

This was the topic of Main Street Project’s latest People’s Tech workshop  (March 19) where we discussed how media literacy could help achieve media justice. In a society where we constantly consume all kinds of media and advertisements, it is important to understand how this driving force can act as both a mirror that reflects society, and also a hammer that shapes it. People’s Tech workshops aim to reclaim technology and educate on the necessity of digital inclusion, seeing that not everyone has equal access to basic forms of communication, a fundamental right. The group consisted of all kinds of people from all walks of life, gathered to understand who owns media, how it affects all of us and how it can be used to the advantage of individuals as well as communities.

We began our discussion by establishing what kinds of questions need to be addressed when understanding media literacy. Should media be objective, or neutral? Is there anything that can be done to change it?  We took sides of the room depending on whether or not we agreed, disagreed, or felt neutral about these types of media related statements.  The exercise helped us realize our different backgrounds and perspectives when it comes to consuming media and led us to an activity that tested our knowledge of media ownership. It is important to understand who controls the majority of media because if it is limited to only a few major corporations, we are consuming a lot of information that is decided by a small group of people.

Why does this matter? When you consider all of the different kinds of media out there including television, newspapers, magazines, radio, movies, internet, etc, you have to wonder if certain messages are being perpetuated by the few corporations who control the media and the weight those messages carry when shaping society and representations. We have to wonder whether or not it is even possible to question these messages if they have such strong placement woven throughout the media we consume. Understanding media ownership is crucial to asking the right questions, and knowing whom, in fact, has power.

We practiced how to deconstruct advertisements based on who the ad is targeted to, and what product is being sold to us. This skill is particularly important for disenfranchised people and/or people who face adversity socially and economically, because they can often be easy targets for advertisers. By understanding how advertisements use various techniques with music, text, humor, placement/location of ad and so on, we can recognize how corporations use media to directly communicate to specific groups in order to sell something. Understanding how advertisements affect and reach us is a step toward becoming active participants in media with a voice that matters.

Basic knowledge and the use of the Internet are some of the best ways to have a voice in what may seem like a world dominated by loud news anchors, celebrities, or large corporations. Equal access to Internet and knowledge of the media is crucial in giving equal opportunities to any and everyone to participate in global, national and local conversations about our future.

This workshop was both eye opening and inspiring for those who attended and helped us begin to learn how to become active consumers of media, rather than passive ones.  We left with an urgency to educate others, and attend People’s Tech workshops in the future that will focus on even more specific themes related to media literacy and media justice.

And a free tamale lunch?  There were no disagreements there.

Learn more about the next People’s Tech workshop on April 16: Digital Storytelling.

Saying Goodbye to Minnesnowta

By Kate Taylor

I can’t believe it’s already February and time to pack up and leave Minnesota! I’ve been working here at Main Street Project/Rural Enterprise Center for 5 months as part of my Emerson National Hunger Fellowship, and it feels like just yesterday that it was still warm enough to head out to the farm in Northfield or enjoy the walk over to my favorite coffee shop in Minneapolis (and still feel my toes). It has been quite an amazing experience – I have learned a tremendous amount in the short time I’ve been here. I thought I’d share a few of the more interesting moments from the past 5 months:

“No, I swear, the weather is not always this bad!”

The weather has continued to challenge my understanding of what it is to be cold. I’m from Chicago, so I’m no stranger to the frigid cold or mountains of snow, but I have to say, Minnesota winter, or at least this winter, has been quite an experience. From a freezing rain induced ice-covered I-94 to the biggest snow storm in 20 years, my car and I have taken a winter beating!

Goats are a girl’s best friend

I am a self-proclaimed city girl (yeah Chicago!), so I’ve probably spent more time on farms in the past 5 months than in the last 22 years. While I really loved the animals and learning about food systems, I have to say, witnessing poultry “processing” was not quite for me. Just ask my supervisors, Kat and Regi, and they’ll tell you that I spent a lot of time petting the goats that day…

People make all the difference

A large portion of my work has included talking to people – in Northfield and other towns in the region. The people I spoke with made this experience what it was, and I learned so much from my conversations with each and every one of them. I am extremely grateful for their openness, thoughtfulness and willingness to talk with me.

The people I have been working with here at Main Street Project and the Rural Enterprise Center have also had a tremendous impact on my work. Kat and Regi have both been incredible supervisors and I have thoroughly enjoyed working here.

Now I can’t say that I’ll miss the weather (just ask my roommate) when I head off to Washington D.C. to work at Justice Policy Institute for the second half of the Fellowship Program, but I will definitely miss many things about Minnesota, especially the people.

Thanks to everyone who has made this such a great experience!

The Team ready for winter (Kate Taylor, Reginaldo Haslett-Marroquin and Kat Vann)

NOT Neutrality for the Internet

By Steven Renderos

Yesterday the FCC voted in favor of adopting Chairman Julius Genachowski’s proposed order on Net Neutrality. The proposal would implement some core principles for wireline broadband (i.e. cable and DSL) around transparency of information, and would restrict the blocking of lawful content on the Internet. It also prohibits unreasonable discrimination. Some of those principles would apply to wireless broadband (mobile devices) but generally, wireless technology is not protected under this order.

Main Street Project and our partner organizations in the Media Action Grassroots Network are disappointed with this decision. There is good intent behind the proposal but ultimately we have to worry about its impact. This version of “Net Neutrality” falls far short of the promises made by the Obama administration and reiterated by Chairman Genachowski the last couple of years.

New rules leave big gaps

Paid Prioritization: Pay-to-play schemes do not preserve the openness of the Internet. Paid Prioritization would allow Internet Service Providers (ISPs) such as Comcast, AT&T and Verizon to charge a website a premium for speed. In effect, websites and applications that have the resources to pay for it could have their content sped up while their competitors lag behind. This is significant because it creates a tiered Internet system, with privileged websites and applications getting preference over others. The rules passed by the FCC today do not close this loophole.

Wireless Protections: The rules as passed would not allow mobile ISPs (Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile) to block lawful websites, but the rules don’t prohibit them from charging different amounts to access different websites. Mobile ISPs are also not allowed to block voice applications (i.e. Skype), but are not prohibited from blocking other applications such as Facebook, PayPal and HootSuite.

Reclassification: In a court case (Comcast v. FCC) in April of this year the D.C. District Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC did not have regulatory authority over broadband services as it is currently classified. Regardless of what rules were passed yesterday by the FCC, an underlying problem is the FCC’s authority to actually enforce these rules.  The FCC could’ve taken the step to resolve this by changing the legal framework that currently oversees broadband services.  However, it didn’t and it’s likely that when the FCC tries to enforce these rules, they’ll be back in court.

These principles of net neutrality are NOT neutral and in fact open the door to anticompetitive practices on the part of Internet service providers looking to expand their markets. The fight for Internet freedom is not over. We plan to continue to push for the protections that our communities deserve.

The rules of the road must reflect the voices of the people in our communities that need them the most. Check out this interview produced by Radio Rootz, a project of the People’s Production House and a partner organization in the Media Action Grassroots Network.

 

Rural Broadband Policy Group sends a message to the FCC

As part of the Rural Broadband Policy Group, Main Street Project signed onto a letter from 18 organizations sent to the FCC this week. Click here to view a copy of the letter and see a full list of endorsers. Or read the following summary written by Edyael Casaperala from the Center for Rural Strategies, explaining why the FCC’s Dec. 21 vote is so important to the future of rural communities.

Rural Communities Tell the FCC to Protect Rural Consumers: Groups Sign Letter Asking FCC to Implement Strong Net Neutrality Rules

The Federal Communications Commission needs to do more to protect the free flow of information and data to rural communities, according to a coalition of organizations working in and serving rural communities.

The National Rural Assembly’s Rural Broadband Policy Group has sent a letter to the FCC urging the commission to expand its proposal for net neutrality. Net neutrality is the principle that all information and applications on the Internet are treated equally and that all consumers have equal access to this information.

“Those of us living in rural America know that access to affordable and open high speed Internet service is critical to being able to compete in the global economy and make our communities strong,” said Mimi Pickering, filmmaker and director of the Community Media Initiative at Appalshop in Whitesburg, Kentucky, who is part of the Rural Broadband Policy Group. “We need the FCC to establish strong net neutrality regulations that protect small rural businesses and innovators.”

The letter was signed by 18 organizations from across the country that focus on a variety of rural issues such as education, affordable housing, conservation, faith-based services, media literacy, and water management. All agreed that open access to broadband is crucial for helping rural communities move forward.

“Remote communities like the Redwood Coast are among the least served for broadband and local media,” said Sean McLaughlin, Executive Director of Access Humboldt, a rural Internet Service Provider in Humboldt, California and member of the Rural Broadband Policy Group. “We understand the need for open access regardless of technology used and we know too well the detrimental impacts when our communications are gated or filtered by outside, commercial interests.”

A 2010 study by the Pew Research Center states that only half of rural residents have high-speed Internet access in their homes, as compared to non-rural areas, which have 70 percent penetration.

“Rural people need full access to the world of ideas and information that the Internet offers and we deserve the opportunity to share our own ideas and information with the world,” said Edyael Casaperalta with the Center for Rural Strategies and coordinator of the Rural Broadband Policy Group. “The FCC cannot allow big carriers like Verizon and AT&T to decide which information or applications we have access to, whether we use a wireless or wireline connection.”

The letter urges the FCC to implement strong protections for wireless Internet access, such as services used on a mobile phone. According to the letter, wireless Internet infrastructure, plans, and devices are more affordable and wireless providers are more available than wireline providers in remote areas. The groups claim that because rural consumers rely most on wireless service, the FCC needs to extend strong net neutrality rules to this type of service.

An open letter to the FCC from Main Street Project: Protect rural communities, not corporations – Implement strong open Internet protections

(Download letter as PDF)

An open Internet means access to health care, small business development, full employment, and quality education. Rural America needs strong open Internet protections to ensure that the legacy of corporate interests do not trump those of working families and everyday Internet users.

Over the past century, industrial agriculture changed the face of Rural America, redefining the traditional roles of farmer owners, farm managers and farm workers. Gone are the days when the vast majority of those who labored in farming also made the decisions and reaped the profits of their work. Today, corporate farming has led to closed markets where prices are fixed through negotiated contracts, and where those who don’t produce at “large scale” are discriminated against in price and other terms of trade. The result is an industry model that demands the loss of local control, increased outside ownership, and intensive exploitation.

Across the Midwest, the factory-like processing of hogs, chickens, corn and soy has more in common with extractive industries like oil, gas and mining that prioritize their profit margins at the expense of our survival. As a result, Rural America has lost tens of thousands of independent operators, small businesses and well-paying jobs as our communities have grown ever more dependent on imported goods and services.

Over the last 20 years, U.S. family farmers and ranchers, rural main-street businesses, and consumer and faith-based organizations have lobbied the USDA and the Secretary of Agriculture to level the playing field and restore the competition lost to Rural America. Main Street Project has been part of this effort. But we know that rebuilding a diverse and resilient rural economy will require this and more–it will require an accessible and affordable Internet.

Without an affordable connection to an open Internet where entrepreneurs can compete, our rural communities are further disadvantaged, disconnected from the twenty-first century information economy, left to linger without an “on-ramp” to jobs, prosperity, and economic security.  We need strong open Internet protections.

The rules that FCC Chairman Genachowski recently proposed are too weak. They do not adequately protect the rights of rural Internet consumers, and do not protect the wireless Internet. The proposal does not establish the authority of the FCC, nor does it support local Internet service providers – both of which would encourage job creation in our communities.  Instead the chairman’s proposed rules would permit companies to discriminate online by interfering with our ability to have unfettered access to the content of our choice. On wireless, he would allow carriers to block, degrade and slow down applications they don’t like. And finally, his proposed rules would allow the big phone and cable companies to favor their own online content or that belonging to a select few companies over their rivals by creating a pay-for-play scheme. None of this serves our needs.

We know the power and reach of the corporate lobby. In our struggle to preserve local ownership over our food system, we have fought to prevent the corporations and their allied trade associations from interfering with the public rulemaking process. Today, in the fight for an open Internet, we urge the FCC to listen to the voices of Rural America, rather than the corporate lobby. We call on the FCC to establish its authority by reclassifying Internet service under Title II, and to draft and implement stronger Net Neutrality rules that treat wireline and wireless Internet equally, prohibit “paid prioritization,” and protect everyday Internet users first.

Respectfully,
The board and staff of Main Street Project

CONTACT: Steven Renderos, (952) 594-9263

Main Street Project is a grassroots media justice, economic development and community building organization. We work to help give community residents of all ages, cultures, place, economic and immigration status the opportunity to more fully participate in all aspects of community life. Learn more at mainstreetproject.org.

Media and Racial Justice at the Facing Race Conference 2010

The Applied Research Center’s (ARC) 2010 Facing Race Conference in Chicago, Illinois, September 23-25 was a great gathering of national racial justice leaders, educators, organizers, journalists such as Melissa Harris-Perry, Van Jones, Tim Wise and Rinku Sen the Executive Director of ARC. At a time when many of us feel frustrated with where policies and politics are at since we elected Barack Obama, our first African American president. Campaign policy promises have been broken, silly public education funding policies have been created and wars persist, most of us love Obama just not his current politics. The conference was not diversity training it was a place for people who are very serious about creating real palpable changes in state and federal legislation, corporate regulations, and policies for racial justice to gain new tools and refuel. Complacency is out.  We must keep things moving, the Facing Race Conference was a great place to do just that, through relationship building, new ideas and information, and movement building.

I had been on Main Street staff for three full but short weeks at the time of the conference so it was an opportunity for me to meet our partners at the Center for Media Justice along with many Media Action Grassroots Network members. Beyond having face-to-face contact with these folks, I was able to listen to Malkia Cyril, Executive Director at the Center for Media Justice sing, “Eyes on the Prize” you know, “ the one thing we did right was the day we started to fight.” It was her call to us to take action be bold and get going. One of my favorite moments took me by surprise. Melissa Harris Perry delivered the keynote speech, I didn’t really know what to expect. I knew she was a professor at Princeton and had been on many political news shows, but I had never seen or heard her speak before. Perry was brilliant, her keynote was titled Race Talk in Real Time: Teachable Moments for the Masses and the Movement, she highlighted six critical political moments from the time of the Obama campaign 2008 to today. She was poignant and absolutely hilarious, there were many times that I thought, “she just said that, she said that to 800 people and it is being videotaped.” I sat at a table of strangers during the keynote by the end of her speech we felt like family because we had shared so many laughs and amens! You can watch her full keynote here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49ocDVphfRA
On the final day of the conference Malkia Cyril introduced the FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn in her introduction Cyril explained the critical connections between race and media justice, in particular the critical debate over how the airwaves will be governed and who will have access to them.  Commissioner Clyburn challenged the audience to take a stand for Internet Freedom and preserve the most dynamic and decentralized media of our generation.  For too many of us our ideas, events and stories whether they be brilliant and courageous or devastating and unjust do not get proper coverage in the media.

The Internet must be defended. The majority of us do not own newspapers, radio stations and definitely not television networks but we can create a website that can be accessed just as fast as NBC, ESPN, or ABC, that is powerful. The Internet allows us to advertise for our small businesses or to send critical information on grassroots movements. It is also rapidly becoming the only way to access crucial information many job applications or resources, housing and health care information. The FCC must define broadband as a universal service, one that the FCC can regulate to maintain neutrality so that all of us have equal access to one of the most important communication infrastructures of our time.

Interested in seeing both Malkia Cyril and FCC Commissioner Clyburn Facing Race speeches?
Malkia Cyril-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF_bLFsSGQw

FCC Commissioner Clyburn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMeuhGC2dgA&feature=channel

Danielle Mkali is the Media Justice Organizer at Main Street Project.
She can be contacted at danielle@mainstreetproject.org

The FCC hears a million voices

Last Thursday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski announced that some broadband aspects would be reclassified as Title II Universal Services. After earlier indications that he might do just the opposite, this was good news for rural communities, and low-income and communities of color. It means the FCC is reclaiming its authority to protect the Internet and ensure open access for everyone – the kinds of priorities outlined in the recently released broadband plan.

It was also a victory for hundreds of grassroots organizations like Main Street Project who stepped up make sure the FCC knew how much was at stake. As part of Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net), we successfully helped mobilize more than a million voices through e-mails, calls, letters, videos, blogs, media appearances and more. Steven Renderos, Main Street Project organizer, and Amalia Deloney, board member and MAG-Net coordinator made the case for action clearly in their May 4 blog post, Yes We Won’t? (also posted on Feministing, MAG-Net, Imagine 2050, and CommonDreams.org).

Of course the fight for an Open Internet isn’t over. Here’s how Timothy Karr from Free Press and SaveTheInternet.com summed things up in a May 7 Huffington Post blog post:

In an age when corporations can spend limitless sums to influence policy, strong arm bureaucrats and sway election outcomes, the public must stand together in defense of the only open communications platform we have left.

Big Telecom may have more money, but we have more voices.

Yes We Won’t?

Amalia Deloney and Steven Renderos wrote this post. It may make it to a few other blogs, too.

We had high apple pie, up in the sky hopes for the promise of an open Internet. Why were communities of color and the poor so happy? Because the key to the Obama Administration’s success in the 2008 elections was harnessing the power of the Internet. Much like the innovation of an open Internet, Obama’s 2008 campaign mobilized communities across the U.S. to engage in the democratic process in ways never conceived before. Excuse the Sinatra references but the problems of a deregulated Internet haven’t gone kerplot. Despite the “hope” offered by President Obama’s promise to ensure an open Internet, the “change” we expected is being threatened as we speak.

According to a recent article in the Washington Post, the FCC may leave the decisions regarding access to the Internet mainly in the hands of the phone and cable companies. Doing so essentially means abandoning net neutrality and other consumer protections. This possibility is the result of the U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia’s recent decision which further questioned the FCC’s authority to regulate Internet service providers. The court left the FCC with two options. One is the use of ‘ancillary’ jurisdiction, which the Washington Post reports is the favored option, right now. The second option would be the reclassification of the Internet from a Title I Service to a Title II Service. The argument against reclassification is that it could impose overly burdensome regulation on carriers, and might deter investment.

The various sides involved in this heated debate would have you believe the question around private investment is the proverbial tipping point. Certainly this is true for the Telco’s—though its clear that their commitment is to increased connectivity that builds an ever-expanding profit margin, rather than connecting the poor. From our perspective, as people who live and work in marginalized communities—it feels different. For our communities, a lack of investment on the part of Internet Service Providers has always been part of the problem—rarely the solution. We believe that net neutrality and a reclassification of the Internet merely reflects the evolution of a service essential to our democracy. Further, it ensures the Internet remains the most transformative communications network ever created. Without this, the Internet’s historic role in helping maintain an informed democracy diminishes, as we begin to divide along newly established digital-citizenry lines.

As Latinos, we understand the harm caused to our communities when we are treated like second-class citizens, we need only look to Arizona.

Our community recently witnessed Governor Jan Brewer (AZ), sign SB1070 into law. You know, the one that establishes Juan Crow in Arizona by giving local law enforcement carte blanche to question anyone they believe to be undocumented. We voiced our emphatic opposition to this law through petitions, art, music and demonstrations. All of these actions were were facilitated through the Internet. The tools of an open net: web casting, Twitter, online petitions, file-sharing, Instant Message and even basic e-mail make it possible for millions of people in our community to have a voice beyond their immediate surroundings. This amplified voice through the Internet is our new democracy, one that doesn’t make the distinction between “legal” and “illegal.” That’s what is at stake for us in the fight for net neutrality.

As we have seen with the previous Administrations, the appointment of the FCC Chairman can be the defining moment in establishing a President’s communications policy. President Obama’s choice of Julius Genachowski to lead the Federal Communications Commission signaled that media and telecommunications issues would take a high profile in this administration.

On November 14, 2007 then Presidential candidate Obama said, “I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality. Because once providers start to privilege some applications or websites over others, then the smaller voices get squeezed out and we all lose. The Internet is perhaps to most open network in history and we have to keep it that way.”

Those of us who work in marginalized communities heard this message. Our hope was that the rhetoric of a transformative candidacy–one geared toward uniting the various divides of the country–would seep into the broader workings of the administrative agencies in Washington, namely the FCC.

And while we, as Latinos—the fastest growing community of color in the United States—have a stake in this fight, so do millions of other people of color, poor, working-class and rural communities. We know we do because nearly 400 organizations representing approximately one million people have signed the same pledge for digital inclusion that we have. We want affordable access AND an open Internet. Why? Because net neutrality is the First Amendment of the Internet. It is a powerful tool for a historically disenfranchised community, and particularly important for a younger generation who deserves constant connectivity as well as the freedom to express themselves and their culture.

We hope that the FCC Chairman listens to our voices. We believe he will, after all he said he would. After Chairman Genachowski delivered his agency’s National Broadband Plan to the public, he sat down for a YouTube Interview in which he answered questions submitted and voted on by U.S. residents on Citizentube . The Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net) , of which we are a part, submitted a question that was voted number one, in our category.

“Will you commit to personally meeting with ‘grassroots groups’ (outside beltway) in the cities that you travel to, especially before moving ahead on important topics like net neutrality, media ownership, and wireless competition?”

His answer, “Yes!” We’re counting on Chairman Genachowski’s commitment to grassroots communities being more than YouTube lip service. We also hope that his commitment extends to these issues irrespective of geography. Even if he’s not traveling to one of the cities we live and work in, we hope our voices matter. We believe they do, and we hope the Chairman believes so, too. After all, the voices of the Telcos shouldn’t be the only ones that get heard. So we still have high hopes that the marginalization our communities face in the physical world aren’t replicated digitally. We’re not asking for regulation that stunts investment to the Internet, instead we DEMAND the preservation of our voices which fuel its growth.

We need you to speak up and tell the FCC not to give away the Internet! Email Commissioner Genachowski & Commissioner Clyburn and let them know we need open Internet!

Authors:
amalia deloney
MAG-Net Coordinator, Center for Media Justice

amalia is a Guatemala-born activist, cultural worker and on staff at the Center for Media Justice. amalia has 15 years of experience in community and cultural organizing and community education. Her specific focus includes human rights and anti-racism education, cultural rights, the production of knowledge, and movement building. amalia earned her B.A. in Urban Studies and History from Macalester College and her Juris Doctorate with a focus on Social Justice from Hamline University School of Law.

Steven Renderos
Media Justice Organizer, Main Street Project

Steven Renderos leads Main Street Project’s media justice and community building efforts, including the Justice 2.0 training project and our collaborative work with the nationwide Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net). He brings more than five years of community organizing and training experience, and more than eight years of filmmaking and media justice organizing to Main Street Project.

Indigenous Peoples Green Jobs Coalition

We recently hosted a Placestories training with the Indigenous People’s Green Jobs Coalition.  They developed six powerful stories that will be displayed at their May 5th Community Forum on Green Jobs.  Here are some pictures of the training.  To view the stories click here

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Rural America a winner in Health Insurance Reform

No doubt about it, rural America is going to get a boost from the health insurance reform measures passed by Congress over the weekend. Regardless of what happens to the additional changes proposed by the House, the basic framework is now the law of the land and begins to move health care in a new direction — forward.

Moving forward by fixing the payment gap in Medicare reimbursement rates that gave unfair advantages to high-cost urban hospitals.

Moving forward by closing the so-called “donut hole” on prescription drug payment for seniors.

Moving forward by allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance policies until age 26.

Moving forward by stopping insurance companies from dropping coverage on you when you get sick.

Moving forward by providing tax credits to small businesses, the main economic engine of our rural communities, to help pay for employee coverage.

Grassroots lobbying by rural American and rural health professionals from every state had a significant impact on the debate. The result is a health care policy that begins to address some uniquely rural problems while laying a solid foundation for community revitalization and economic renewal.

That’s how democracy is supposed to work.