Two blog posts in one day you lucky, lucky, non existent readers…
Anywho, I’m going to write about a media space that enables the public to engage in political debate.
I’m not really sure if this counts as “media space” but traditionally you can protest on the street outside of a shop (if you disagreed with their labour practices, for example) or at a publically owned institution like a library or town hall. So essentially the space I am writing about is ‘public space’.
Being allowed to voice dissent or opinions in a way that EVERYONE can do and that can influence the opinions of others seems, to me, an essential part of democracy and the freedoms it enables us. Whilst the ordinary citizen cannot have a direct input on how the country is run (ah, the failings of a top-down democracy) they can be effective at a grass roots level. Protesting outside of a GAP or Nike shop because of their labour practices and trying to start a general boycott of their goods can create both bad publicity for the company and the risk of falling revenue. Essentially this means anyone can affect a market and make a change, for GAP and Nike are both businesses trying to make a profit and so they’re going to try and operate in a way to maximise this.
If enough people are upset at something their local council has done they should be able to make this known at their town hall or somewhere similar. This kind of activism can attract attention which helps strengthen the voice in a good way, or perhaps criticising the reasons for protest so if the form of protest begins to gain momentum (people start giving support via the local press, blogs, and protesting in these public spaces) it can make a change, and if it doesn’t then not enough people agree so chances are your actions will be ineffective. Seems quite democratic to me.
The problem arises when these spaces are no longer public but privately owned. This is increasingly the case – shops are no longer simply just on a high street but in shopping centres owned by a company. The owners of these private spaces can effectively censor protest by banning it for whatever reasons they want, or claim to suggest is an issue, such as safety. I think that this creates something of an issue of the idea of free speech and also, possibly, allows certain companies to continue conducting themselves immorally without much consequence.
There was a story on the Guardian site recently (here) where someone was banned from protesting in their PUBLIC townhall because the building the townhall is in is PRIVATELY owned. If these public spaces continue to become private spaces then there could be dire consequences for our ability and right to voice disagreement with The Establishment.
It could be argued that public space is not a media space but public protest can usually incorporate pamphlets, placards, and other printed media. Besides, it was this or write about blogging but Patrick has already done it so well on CEMP.
