![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 January 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph of building of organization be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Okay, good information here but it's not formatted properly. It reads like a FreePress.net website. I'll see what I can do to find more information on them from other sources and to rewrite the descriptions so they are more objective. Help would be appreciated! - KellyLogan 18:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Can anybody in the know have a look at the references of Barker, Michael - since User:Mike31 just added that, I'm a little suspicious about its relevance. Same goes for Media democracy Amalthea ( talk) 01:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
" The Net Neutrality Coup; The Campaign to Regulate the Internet was Funded By a Who's Who of Left-Liberal Foundations," by John Fund, Wall Street Journal, 21 December 2010. -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 20:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Nominated this article for DYK: Template_talk:Did_You_Know#Free Press Jaobar ( talk) 19:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I see as I was writing this that user OCNative placed a tag in this edit indicating his opinion that this article "sounds like an ad", according to his edit summary. I presume he saw the discussion at DYK, since he frequently contributes there. He didn't comment there, nor here.
In general, tagging an article without making a good-faith effort to express one's specific, actionable concerns is discouraged; the usual term for doing so is "drive-by tagging". If OCNative would like to express such actionable concerns here, he's welcome to do so. I'd especially ask him to communicate in as civil and welcoming a manner as possible, remembering that the editors who've contributed most to this article recently are new users involved in a college class project through our campus outreach program. – OhioStandard ( talk) 17:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
In what appears to be a soapbox promotional campaign for a law professor named "Marvin Ammori" this page (among several others) was recently supplemented with a fully unsourced section, which I include below. I didn't want to remove it in full; instead, per the verifiability guidelines, I am including it here for archival purposes and to leave open the opportunity to add citations so that it is appropriate for inclusion. Note, the user (IP: 69.181.199.191) may be worth observing for future soapbox activity.
What follows is the original unsourced content.
Section Header: Formal Complaint of Free Press & Public Knowledge Against Comcast Corp. for Secretly Degrading Peer-to-Peer Applications Free Press has been perhaps most active on the issue of network neutrality, partly through leadership of Save the Internet and partly through leadership on the most prominent network neutrality case in the United States. Free Press led a group of consumer groups seeking to declare that Comcast had chosen an illegal means of managing peer to peer protocols. The DC Circuit reversed the FCC’s decision in favor of Free Press. Free Press General Counsel Marvin Ammori handled the case before the FCC and argued it for intervenors, alongside the FCC, on appeal.
Columbus Free Press now appears on the Internet as The Free Press
The Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism provides progressive activist news, political analysis, and social issue commentary through freepress.org, CICJ Books, alternative media projects and sponsorship of community events promoting journalism and social justice.
The Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism (CICJ) currently publishes the Free Press newspaper, Free Press Express broadsheet, the website freepress.org, books, and other educational materials. The CICJ sponsors journalistic activities such as community radio, video production, the local film festival, film screenings, speakers, conferences, educational workshops, election protection, and other special events. The CICJ partners with local activist organizations, holds monthly community salons, and an annual awards dinner to honor community activists. The CICJ also acts as a fiscal agent for other nonprofit organizations and individuals.
The original Columbus Free Press grew out of the anti-war movement on the campus of Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio in October 1970. Inspired by the activism against the Vietnam War and the senseless killings at Kent State, the underground paper was published for a 25-year tumultuous history (1970-1995). Like other underground alternative publications around the country, the Free Press went through many changes through the years. It served as the voice of the students in the early 70's, reporting on social justice issues such as sexism, racism, peace activism, corporate misdeeds, politics and the counterculture. Constantly struggling to survive on a shoestring budget, it encountered opposition from without and within. Internal ideological struggles were compounded, for example, when police arrested four of the editors in 1971 for "inciting riot."
The Free Press founders grew older, less militant, got jobs but the paper survived. Changing faces on the editorial staff show different politics and policies through the years. The Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism 501(c)3 nonprofit organization was founded in 1986 as the sponsor of the Free Press newspaper.
Finally, after floundering through the Reagan-Bush '80's and hampered by a lack of an activist movement in the city, the Free Press faced so much competition in the "alternative" newspaper marketplace in Columbus that revenues dried up. It published its 25th Anniversary issue in October 1995, only with dollars donated from then-Columbus Guardian publisher Ron Williams; and ceased publication temporarily. The Free Press was resurrected as a website in early 1996 courtesy of longtime volunteer and activist Tim Wagner. The website developed during the next two years and the printed publication emerged as a quarterly journal in the Winter of 1998. A new Board of Directors formed and gradually the Free Press is back up and running in Central Ohio.
The Free Press now honors community activists annually with a "Libby" Award for Community Activism, named for a former Free Press editor, Libby Gregory, who lost her life in 1991 in an airplane accident. In 1998, a Selma Walker Award for lifetime achievement in Human Rights activism was added in honor of Selma Walker, the founder of the local Native American Indian Center.
The CICJ is a member of Community Shares of Mid Ohio, earning a small amount of funds through workplace campaigns. Look for the Free Press/Democratic Socialists of Central Ohio wine booth at the Community Festival each year during the last weekend in June. The Free Press is dependent on subscriptions, donations and fund-raising events to stay alive.
Believing that there's still a place for community-based journalism, the struggle moves forward, awaiting the rise of the next left mass movement that's willing to speak truth to power.
Someone keeps adding info about supposed funding from George Soros and Barbra Streisand, but the source is weak -- the editor is citing UNNAMED SOURCES in a Washington Post article. The group does get some funding from Soros' Open Society Foundations but has never received $$ from Streisand. It appears the editor is using her name b/c she's a right-wing punching bag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coriander12 ( talk • contribs) 17:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Editor & Publisher | Bob Fitrakis Managing Editor | Suzanne Patzer Senior Editor | Harvey Wasserman
—
Pawyilee (
talk) 07:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
The organization has been accused many times of having a liberal bias; however, their work is consistently non-partisan, with many efforts involving individuals occupying a variety of political positions. One needs only study their media ownership work to see their connections to right and left wing politicians and advocacy groups. Net neutrality is also not a "liberal" issue, no matter how it is framed in the news. One should not forget that many American liberals support neoliberal policy approaches. I am modifying the edit made to the political leanings of the organization as the information is not accurate. If citations are required to demonstrate their work with conservative and liberal politicians, I will be happy to add them at a later date. -- Jaobar ( talk) 04:08, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Neutrality is adamant that the political agenda of Free Press not be mentioned on this page. This is odd because this is lobbying group with a clear agenda. Here's some evidence:
"Eric Klinenberg’s Fighting for Air: The Battle to Control America’s Media (2007) is the first to chronicle both corporate media consolidation and its discontents, although it builds off of Robert McChesney’s work on both fronts (e.g., McChesney, 2007; McChesney, 2004; McChesney & Nichols, 2002; Nichols & McChesney, 2005). Engaging in an overview of media reform activism presents some uncertainties over who and what merits attention. By the “media reform movement” (or the “media democracy movement”),2 I mean those groups and individuals whose primary political goals target the regulations governing media institutions. Though promoting a vision of media localism, these organizations tend to be focused on national regulations, primarily those of the Federal Communications Commission, as well as Congressional funding for public broadcasting and the malfeasance of corporate media. National non-profit organizations, mainly Free Press (created by McChesney, along with progressive journalist John Nichols and activist Josh Silver), occupy a central position in the thinking, actions, and visibility of such activism...
"It is too simple to point out that a victory for media reform tomorrow would be insufficient to solve the world’s problems, or even the media’s. But the structure and articulated vision of a political coalition bespeaks its hopes and the possibilities it seeks to actualize. So it is on this ground — that is, taking the movement at its word — through which I analyze the struggle for national media reform. While a specific consideration of genre and cultural policy is outside the scope of this article, I argue below that the national media reform coalition is hampered by pursuing a strategy oriented around FCC liberalism and economistic arguments while ignoring media texts and rituals. I conclude by discussing other contemporary attempts at media-based activism that orient their struggles for democracy within a framework of expanding social justice. These efforts are arguably more reminiscent of media activism in other countries, where challenging media content is fundamental to battling authoritarian control of both the state and the market."
Given that McChesney and Nichols founded Free Press and McChesney is still on the board, this more than justifies my claim that Free Press is a leftwing organization. But for bonus points, here's more from McChesney:
"Of course, given the existing power structure of U.S. society and the seven-decades-long ceiling on civilian government purchases as a percentage of GDP, all of this may appear to be pie in the sky. And our message is that it is, unless the power structure of U.S. society can be altered. Only a reform movement so radical that it would appear revolutionary within the context of the existing U.S. economic and social order, fundamentally reducing the field of operation of the capitalist market, holds any chance of substantially improving the conditions of most people in society. Needless to say, for such a struggle to succeed people will have to have a sense of real things to struggle for that will materially affect their lives.
"These gains will only be made through an enormous class struggle from below. If won, they will not, we underscore, eliminate the evils of capitalism, or the dangers it poses for the world and its people. In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles. This is something that the great majority of the population will undoubtedly learn in the course of their struggles for a more equal, more humane, more collective, and more sustainable world. In the meantime, it is time to begin to organize a revolt against the ruling class–imposed ceiling on civilian government spending and social welfare in U.S. society." [1]
This quote was cited by FCC Chairman to support his claim that Free Press has a socialist agenda. RichardBennett ( talk) 02:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
References
Per the Wikipedia article on Robert W. McChesney, he is "an American professor notable in the history and political economy of communications, and the role media play in democratic and capitalist societies." As of 2022-12-03, the word "socialism" or "socialist" does not appear in that article. Those words also do NOT appear in the reference given for that claim in this article on "Free Press (organization)":
Accordingly, I'm changing "socialist writer Robert McChesney" to "media scholar Robert McChesney". DavidMCEddy ( talk) 22:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
This article is the subject of an
educational assignment at
Michigan State University supported by
WikiProject United States Public Policy and the
Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available
on the course page.
The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}}
by
PrimeBOT (
talk) on 16:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)