Mainstream newspaper shocks with fair coverage of direct action camp

by Guardianista Wed Aug 22, 2007 19:44

George Monbiot (who is more of an activist than a journalist) was at the camp and wrote about it in his Guardian column.

Beneath Heathrow's pall of misery, a new political movement is born http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,2153044,....html

Helen Pidd, a Guardian staffer, tried to sneak in to the camp undercover but was spotted and thrown out- she wrote amusingly about her experiences in the Guardian yesterday.

Undercover reports from Camp Climate
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2152877,00.html

by dunk Wed Aug 22, 2007 20:51 fuspey at yahoo dot co dot uk

The discussion is widening, who knows where it will lead to?

In one of the assemblys at the climate camp one of the core crew that helped organise this climate camp announced that there was some bad news, i paraphrase: "a journalist we knew spent time on the camp with the understanding that he would not write an article (probably due to a prior camp agreement on relationship with mainstream journalists) put he broke his promise which raises serious issues about trust, BUT he did write a cracking article about us and what we are doing."

below is a link to the earlier post i added today, which includes vid and print links to main and alt media of the climate camp, it includes the above independant article you refer to.

As someone who usually tries to approach people in the hope of opening up a fluid dialogue about the issues, no matter who they are, what side they are on, what biased views they are supposed to hold, we found that many people are coming round to the basic argument that has been made: present ways are unsustainable and have to change. We blockaded a hotel that supports aviation and on leaving the guard said "im with you guys, but just doing my job" and later when engaging in dialogue with the riot cops who "kettled" us, a constructive dialogue happened about how best things can be improved in an ecological sense...
So with that im happy to see the positive response from the mainstream british media, as from nearly all angles you cant but argue that our argument is sound, from that I hope and indeed expect that many more people will think about the idea of visiting and from that participating in future actions at future climate camps, wherever they might be... For me of course its right to outline the base causes of ecological destruction, call these the basic enemy if you will, and this includes capitalism in all forms, but for me the main "target" has always been those people who are in a position to do something but dont. Exploring ways to excite more people, make the "struggle" not a negative chore like activity but a passionate life enriching act that anyone can do, is a really important angle in the "activist" world.... Micheal Alberts "stickiness" comes to mind, as does various seomra spraoi meetings but I feel we have not addressed this side of things enough.

So, perhaps the times are changing and with that we can expect more people to take that first little step to try to make the world a better place... Sounds idealistic: yes, But is it feasible, personally: absolutely yes....as stated in previous post:
new chapter has opened up for the worlds social movements

Coincidentaly, I write this as im half way through the fine magazine Turbulance which explores the idea of : What would it actually mean to win?

The current article, "Politics in an age of fantasy" first came to my attention through the CIRCA email lists... all about dreaming the alternative... exploring what we are for as simply fighting what we are against
http://www.turbulence.org.uk/politicsinanageo.html
from
http://www.turbulence.org.uk/turb_june2007.html (you can also read the PDF version from this link)

The Turbulence mags were printed in time for the recent G8 and also include an article from the climate camp team about last years camp and what they are about:
A new weather front
http://www.turbulence.org.uk/anewweatherfront.html

extracts:
Our attempts to shut it down were an audacious strike both at a source of CO2 emissions and a lynchpin of 21st century capitalism.

The camp embodied three key ideas. First, a commitment to direct action: a belief that solutions to the problem of climate change lie not with governments and corporations but with grassroots movements for change.

Second, a commitment to popular education. The camp was a site for over 100 meetings and workshops, on climate and related issues.

Finally we experimented with alternatives to the social relations of capitalism. The camp was organised as an autonomous space, from eating to entertainment to satellite-linked internet connections, with decisions made via non-hierarchical methods of consensus and a strong commitment to limiting our environmental impact.

by why? Thu Aug 23, 2007 08:47

Monbiot is a pain in the ass and everyone knows the work the camp did, therefore there
really is no need to preach to the converted.

For those who can open their eyes this site and most of the european sites have been covering
the Climate Camp which we all know is about run away planning which is unsustainable,
a bit like Tara. we also know that right-wing governments do this to increase the non-mandated
corporate lobbies political influence (like Tara) . we don't need pictures, its been covered here
since last sunday and in the Uk since build up and planning.
Monbiot is old hat, the acceptable face of the normalisation of anti-terror laws being used
against NVDAS.

this report is just underscoring the eternal chip on the shoulder for those who
feel the need to categorise and justify action.

by dunk Fri Aug 24, 2007 11:03

In response to WHY?: no need to preach to the converted.

Granted, but as stated earlier, the target for many are the UN-converted. Our movement is still only a fraction of what it could be and what many believe of what it will become. So with that it is worth the time and effort to explore ways in which things can be changed so that more start to think critically and from that take action. Obviously media, mainstream and alternative, has to be critically adressed. Your views and others as to how this can best be achieved are welcome.

on related note about this and activist strategy, from imc-uk:

Giving the Climate Camp a Good Telling Off!
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/379559.html

some extracts:

A system of affinity groups and neighbourhoods, feeding their decisions upwards to general meetings, permitted a genuine participatory democracy of the kind that you will never encounter in British public life. The actions themselves were disciplined and remained non-violent, even when the police got heavy.

-----Monbiot, ‘Beneath Heathrow's pall of misery, a new political movement is born,’ The Guardian, August 21, 2007)

“I attended the climate camp and found the event deeply inspiring and uplifting. The camp was characterised by values of selflessness, solidarity and cooperation. I have never known anything like it - intelligent and deeply committed people acting together for a greater cause.

-----Activist Chris Shaw

-----Guardian environment editor John Vidal wrote bitterly:
A small but anonymous faction of the old protest movement at the climate camp had decided from the start that the 'corporate' press is actually the enemy, and therefore has to be excluded.” (Vidal, ‘Climate camp’s media mismanagement,’ The Guardian, August 21, 2007; http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/2007 /08/climate_camps_media_mismanagme.html)

Vidal concluded of the activist movement seeking action on climate change:

“Via its media strategy it threatens to become one more totalitarian, exclusive group that is neither liked nor taken seriously.

---------------------------------

Previously many media sources have given slanted views of actions and movements, most of us are aware of this, but it seems there has been a genuine wish or attempt this time by mainstream to tell the story of the climate camp, how its formed, what array of things happened in it and from it, and to accurately inform the wider community / the public, as to what happened on the actions.... peaceful and legitamite protest met by v heavy handed police response...

(For people not to sure of the anti-mainstream relationship, worth viewing is the 21 minute documentary from undercurrents:
Globalisation and the Media, found at http://youtube.com/watch?v=A6HRt1bH_dw )

So now that this climate camp and the telling of its story has happened, what would be a desirable next step...

How are we going to win?

related links:

Climate Camp, Heathrow (IMC-IE feature)
http://indymedia.ie/article/83826

climate camp web
http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/

IMC-UK climate camp
https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2007/climat...camp/

UK Camp for Climate Action Targets Aviation Industry (IMC-ORG feature)
http://www.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/891052.shtml

Indymedia centre at Climate Camp
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378427.html

by Trek1.0 Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:39

when you look at the great big adverts and promotions across from Johann (former bomber-left) Hari's piece and others.

Monbiot's earlier article in the Guardian mentions this particular Independent article in an article in respose to an interesting Medialens debate.

The editorials urge us to cut emissions, but the ads tell a very different story

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,214825....html

....But I write all this with the blush of the hypocrite, for I have been forced to concede that, I too, am complicit in the strategies of corporate power. A few weeks ago I was challenged by the editors of a website called Medialens over advertisements carried by the Guardian. Does not part of my living ultimately come from the companies I campaign against? Why don't I discuss this contradiction in my column?

It is a good question, and it requires an answer. You cannot open a newspaper without being confronted by a host of incongruities. Yesterday, the Telegraph urged people to share their car journeys as "a simple way to lessen your carbon footprint". Beside this exhortation, and at six times the size, was an ad by Ryanair for £10 flights to France. Johann Hari in the Independent urged people to join the climate campers at Heathrow, then that newspaper pressed its readers to take advantage of its own special offers - to fly to Spain, Kenya or California. The Guardian led on its story about the government's renewables policy, then ran an ad for renewable energy by E.ON, which (in view of its plans to build new coal-burning power stations) looks to me like greenwash. The paper also carried a reader offer of a cruise around Scotland, which begins by "flying from a range of UK airports". The editorials urge us to cut our emissions. The ads urge us to raise them....

It's all about appealing to a top 10-20% of the populace so as to sell then the adds that are appropriate to the advertisers whilst not rocking the boat in terms of reportage of actual solutions. When was the last time the Independent mentioned contraction and convergence for instance?