Occupy this Book

Sections of this book are ridiculously repetitive from the first book we read.  The section on how news organizations decide what news is, for example, could've been inserted word for word into the first book and I wouldn't have noticed any difference.

Title:  News, in My News Feed?:  Social Media and the Parallel Press of the Self
Hypothesis:  Parallel presses are being created on an individual level via social media sites.

Abstract:  Once upon a time, parallel presses were required to get out the message of oppressed groups.  Nowadays, however, we are constantly constructing our own, individual "parallel press" via the use of social media.  By surrounding ourselves with sources and people we trust that typically share our viewpoint, we are enhancing and cementing our conformity bias in the news we are exposed to.

---

Title:  Hey Ho, We Want a Show:  Drawing the Line on Protest Coverage
Hypothesis:  The implication of this book that all protest movements should be covered is ridiculous.

Abstract:  In this text, Larson implies that pretty much every protest movement should receive media coverage, and cites the 89 Native Americans that occupied Alcatraz Island as an example of one that did not receive enough national coverage.  The problem with this is that there is no way everyone would be happy with what is selected for coverage, and there's no way to show every protest movement without having a 24/7 protest channel that no one would watch unless it involved dick and fart jokes about the protesters or something.  Should the national media cover the union protests in north Austin in front of Fast Eddy's because they hired non-union workers to do something (I'm not sure what, they really need to give me more information on their posters)?  Should the national media cover every time those whacky Phelps people protest something?  Should protesters even want friendly media in their midst, after famous Civil Rights movement photographer Ernest Withers turned out to be an FBI informant?

---

There are a lot of cool parallels (man I'm stuck on that word) between the measures described in this book and the media's actions around Wikileaks.  After all, I'm sure most of you know who this man is:

But how many of you know what's going on with Bradley Manning's court case?  Or what Wikileaks has done in the past ~3 years?  Or what Assange has said about anything since locking himself in the Ecuadorian embassy?

Lightning rods.  Everywhere.