Indy Media Watch

South Park's latest episode was entitled Smug. Like most episodes of this show, it pulled no punches and this time leveled itself particularly against residents of San Francisco. Wikipedia episode synopsis here.

After buying a hybrid car, Kyle's dad becomes tremendously smug, preaches to others and smugly talks with his eyes closed. Eventually, he decides to move the family to San Francisco where they can be with other hybrid car drivers who 'get it' like he does.

Kyle's father is glad to meet other like minded San Franciscans who, loving the smell of their own farts (remember this is South Park) frequently mid-conversation, will loudly fart, bend over and inhale with pleasure, then resume discussing their personal philosophies and loudly congratulating themselves for being far more progressive than the rest of the country.

Kyle meets other Bay Area kids, who explain that they spend their time taking drugs and drinking, which their parents don't mind and this helps them to deal with their "smugginess."

I can't find any mention of this episode or its point on SF or Bay Area Indymedia. Perhaps they are too smug to watch South Park - I don't know.

I do know they are in a frenzy over this post comparing some pro-Israel demonstrators with anti-war demonstrators. The incorrect assumption is presented that "pro-Israel" must mean pro-war, simply because the bulk of the anti-war movement has been sided with anti-Israel groups. This was demonstrated by this response:

Thanks, Skippy. Only on Indybay would someone holding a "Pro Israel Pro Peace" sign be labeled racist.

Notice the old lady holding the anti-war sign? She was one of many who came over to the true side for peace. At this rally, we had many cross-overs, whom all resented how the anti-war movement had been hijacked into a catchall for every leftist with an agenda. Thats why the true side of peace grows with every event, while the ANSWER side decreases.

Also:

The ANSWER Rally was nothing like a "Peace Rally". There was one element that was highly pro-War, vocal and threatening.... but against Israel. What does their war mongering have to do with "peace."

More on this phenomena in an excellent article in Slate here.

This comment saw the Israel supporters labeled "Nazis". Truly an intellectual argument. They were called on it:

Could anybody here just check a dictionary for the definition of the word "racism", you are using so often? You will be surprised.

This is then followed by 4-5 page essays, cut and pasted from elsewhere to try and win the argument. These may be duly ignored. However, this one is interesting:

Indybay is only open to ONE point of view. We get this re-cycled, re-posted anti-zionist spam (if you read it closely, all it says is "The Arabs should have won, wah, wah, wah.") We get articles from Arab media only, like Electronic intifada, Islam on Line. Indybay deletes any pro-Israel comments and articles all while crowing that this is an "alternative to the mainstream media."

This is responded to:

We get your point of view in the commercial media.

This is countered by:

Nonsense, this is the same whiny stuff we see in the supposed "main stream media." Same Palestinian photographers, "sob sister" stories, teddy bears tossed onto debris to make a "better" photo op. The only difference is that sometimes the [San Francisco] Chron will allow a dissenting voice in the letters to the editors. Indybay permits no dissent.

This generates a heated response - feel the love here:

Where is that? Show me a single **US corporate mainstream** (note every word of emphasis, zio-slime) news item that **explicitly develops** (note every word of emphasis, zio-slime) the position that Israel and zionism have come to represent "racist ideology" or "Jewish Nazism." I will chew up, swallow, and shit my fucking hat into a bowl and then do it again while it's still nice and steamy. Such interpretations are staunchly suppressed by mainstream US propaganda machines.

Hang on - just because the mainstream media doesn't share his paranoia of "Jewish Nazis" or no doubt that Jews were behind 9/11, does not prove there is a problem in the mainstream media. That the alternative media is held up as the solution to this 'problem' however begs the question, what is 'alternative media'?

If it is to be alternative to the mainstream press, where do journalistic principles come into play? The fact is, one can find mainstream media at all ends of the political spectrum. Surely then, the Alternative Media would emulate this, perhaps concentrating on 'alternative news'. Not so on Indymedia it seems, which is why the following comments, astonishing in their political naiveté can be made with a straight face:

The US government is clearly biased towards the Israelis...The US allows Israel to have nukes but would act to prevent Palestinians from getting nukes. The US would condemn any Palestinians attempts to send soliders into Israel but frequently backs Israeli soliders in Palestinian areas.

Quick quiz: Question one: Israel has nukes. Have they ever been used? Question two: If the Palestinians had a single nuclear weapon, how quickly would it be used?

Irrespective of your political viewpoint, the answers should remain the same if you are honest.

As for "Palestinian soldiers" - try a Google Image search for "Hamas" and ask whether you would let them into your own country. Before anyone claims Hamas and "Palestinian soldier" aren't one and the same, bear in mind who won the recent Palestinian elections.

Is disseminating this form of propaganda (much of which wasn't quoted above) really what the "alternative media" wants to be? For this is what it currently is.