Breaking Through The Information Blockade 

Page 2 of 3

When the protesters hit the streets, Indymedia became the nerve center for an army of volunteer journalists, issuing press passes and giving them an online outlet to file their reports. Indymedia received almost immediate attention, and their website received over a million hits during and immediately after the Seattle protests. The Nation correspondent Stephanie Greenwood dropped by their newsroom during the protests and found the Indymedia newsroom "full of committed people doing really good documentary work and reporting. . .Something is starting."

By successfully doing an "end-run around the information gatekeepers," John Tarleton wrote in Nieman Reports, Indymedia's success wasn't confined to creating "one more alternative lefty publication." Rather, they had created "the infrastructure for a multimedia peoples' newsroom" that would reach a global audience "without having to go through the corporate filter." This was grassroots Web journalism at an unprecedented level.

The spread of Indymedia

By February 2000, Indymedias were being established in cities like Washington, Antwerp, Philadelphia, Portland, and Vancouver. By the end of the year 2000, over 30 Indymedias were scattered across the globe, and the number is now over 60. Cities with an activist movement or those anticipating meetings and protests were prime candidates for an Indymedia, and the www.Indymedia.org website provides guidelines and a technical infrastructure for those interested in starting a local office.

What makes the concept of Indymedias different than many online alternative news sources is their focus on grassroots reporting and online publication. While other online alternative news sources often fill their webpages with editorials, commentaries, and news analysis, Indymedia's primary emphasis is providing an outlet for filing original, first-hand coverage online through print, photos, audio, and video.

It's all facilitated through an impressive technical help network and infrastructure. The main Indymedia website provides a wealth of technical information and support for local branches and reporters. A detailed "Tech FAQ" answers most questions, and other detailed pages discuss such topics as website maintenance, information access, downloading stories, and using streaming media.

When the first Indymedia opened in Seattle, stories were published on the Web with little editorial oversight. Following an "open posting" policy, anyone could file a report. As the movement developed, Indymedia staffers noticed that reports varied in quality. Soon "there was a fairly standard newsroom in operation, "the American Journalism Review observed. Stories are ranked by a group of readers, and the ones deemed most newsworthy appear as leading stories, while the rest end up in a separate "open publishing" column. This editorial system, which is hotly contested on Indymedia mailing lists, seems best stated by one British Indymedia member who claimed that the issue for Indymedias wasn't free speech per se as much as "how our speech can be used to create a sustainable and equitable society." In the end, quality stories take precedence over inferior ones.

Indymedia at work

A visit to the Indymedia main webpage (www.Indymedia.org) in late October shows an active, dynamic presentation of news. Below the top banner are three columns, with the center column featuring the main stories. The lead story was ongoing coverage of the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, headlined "9-11: Peace & Justice." Following that were stories about battles in Bolivia between farmers and the government and an extensive story on how "fighting terrorism" has meant suppression of civil liberties around the world. Next were reports on large protests in Belgium, Canada, and Norway. Each story is extensively hyperlinked to Indymedia field reports and other news sources. The articles from Bolivia and Europe feature street reports from the protest front, while the ongoing coverage of the September 11 attacks features a backfile of Indymedia reports and analysis. A column on the right has links to upcoming international events that Indymedias will be covering, as well as a list of "open publishing" articles -- items submitted by individuals that reflect a myriad of views, mostly liberal. A column on the left features a search engine, links to all the Indymedia local sites, and links to technical and organizational sections of the webpage.

Most of the local Indymedia offices feature a similar interface and alternative news philosophy as the main webpage. The Israeli Indymedia, for instance, provides English, Arabic, and Hebrew pages. Articles in the center column offered a different perspective from what the mainstream US press presents of Israeli politics and life. Articles included a critique of the Israeli government's military oppression of Palestinians, a report on the cruel treatment of Israeli conscientious objectors, several critiques of US policy in the Middle East, and other views not normally presented by American news sources. Along the right column were "open" postings, again in three languages.

While Independent Media Centers first gained international attention in Seattle, they've also caught the mainstream press's eye in various other places. At the 2000 Republican National Convention, the Philadelphia Indymedia received national press coverage as an alternative to corporate media. Indymedia's coverage of the violence at the G8 meeting in Genoa in summer of 2000 -- some of it aimed at Indymedia itself -- was documented by an Indymedia video journalist, and broadcast worldwide on the Web. In the short time since their birth, Indymedia websites have been growing in popularity, providing "a fuller record" of the news than that of the "mainstream media," according to The Guardian of London. Indymedias are earning respect for providing what one academic journal dubbed "important and pretty damned thrilling" alternative coverage of the news.