September 09, 2004

Independent World Television?

There's a proposal from a bunch of big name media activists and left leaning journalists to start, Independent World Television, international progressive television news network. They aim to raise a fair amount of money, 100 million dollars, and have a professional staff of journalists while drawing on some AP and/or Reuters footage.

It seems like it's a cross between a progressive english language version of Al-Jazeera and a TV version of IPS.

The general drive seems to get alternative content out there to an audience, not change the relationships around which media production and consumption are built. This is quite different from the 'media revolution to make revolution possible' and 'become the media' missions of indymedia. I bet the two will co-exist similarly to the sometimes tense, sometimes cooperative relationship between democracy now and indymedia.

What i do wonder, is this. Is this the best strategy at the moment? Aren't we about to see a revolution in the way TV is transmitted similar to what is happening with VOIP in the telephony world? Will the 24 hour news channel go the way of the evening news? What are the implications to ubiquitous bandwidth, narrowcasting, very low cost barriers to entry for production, and the end of broadcast television?

Today i could spend a few weeks hacking VLC in to a television transmitter and make a TV station which pulled all of it's content off of the internet (bit torrent, p2p, sites) in to an automated television station. The whole thing, would probably cost about $2000. It'd be illegal, even though there is no shortage of tv channel spectrum. The point is, things are in the process of fundamentally changing.

We need to be looking at places like South Korea where video activists are making weekly news programs which are broadcast via the net to factory lunch rooms.

What happens when people start being able to build applications on top of software defined radio?

Things could start to get really interesting.

Posted by rabble at September 9, 2004 03:47 AM | TrackBack
Comments

There's an interesting tension here.

The basic source of it is how to use resources, and a question of how many resources are needed. There's an assumption that for something to have a broad reach, it has to be professional (read: expensive) from top to bottom.

Meanwhile, the low-hanging fruit is rotting. It often occurs to me to start up a two-watt (i.e. not intensely illegal in Canada) station with a pc, a net connection and a transmitter. People in my neighborhood would have a round-the-clock source of spoken word and music, should they care to tune in. I get the sense that it *doesn't* occur to people who start projects like IWT to do this kind of thing.

I see the 'net-enabled grassroots media as being, at the very least, the first layer upon which other media projects can be based. So much of the information flow and infrastructure is there; all it needs is to be packaged and delivered... the last mile, as it were.

But these folks still find it necessary to build the entire infrastructure from scratch. (100 million could be 20,000 little grants of $5000 each, each one paying for a year or two's work from a full time correspondent somewhere in the global south, a radio station, a computer lab, or whatever else. 20,000! TV with a similar cost, is, as you say, around the corner.)

I ran into this tension a few weeks ago when I found out that Adbusters was raising $60,000 for one full-page ad in the Globe and Mail to call attention to media concentration... the irony being that $60k is the same amount I'm trying to raise to give the Dominion national distribution through the establishment of a number of local editions.

At any rate, I see the Dominion (and more and more other projects) as being possible because of grassroots media, including indymedia. Another layer of the same cake, maybe. (a low-hanging fruit cake?) We're trying to adapt some of the same aspects of decentralization, while focussing more on delivery to the mainstream that might otherwise be scared off by the polemics and chaos of open publishing. Another piece of the media ecology.

Maybe that's another good metaphor to illustrate the tension: ecology vs. engineering.

Enough spouting, anyway. Glad to see you commenting at length about independent media and revolution again. Makes me think we should start a group blog about media revolution, even if it's only re-posts initially. I could go through the politics of tech category on misnomer and--one by one--polish, update and extend bits from there to be more coherent. Lemme know if you're interested.

Posted by: dru at September 9, 2004 09:30 PM

that is a free tv in brasil where ppl is working on have a stream of it...the project is called TV7Z and is one of the projects from the submidia collective:
submidia.radiolivre.org

Posted by: toya at September 10, 2004 05:46 PM

CORRECTION!!!
I just wanted to clarify to whom and in reference to what i writing about because i just realized that a large chunk of my post was deleted. Al Gore is attempting to organize a international 'indy' MEDIA tv network and sent out a call to all guerilla film makers and writers. I wrote to the homies at the 'station' and i copied an email above. I think that a collectively organized not for profit indy tv station would be absolutley amazing - i think that the attempt of people with money and power to appropriate this for profit would not. Sorry for the confusion.
Always in A hurry looking for more of the revolution!,

Djette

Posted by: DJetteAporetics at September 10, 2004 11:42 PM

Low power community TV stations are rather easy and inexpensive to put together. We are currently testing out several configurations. Thanks to the availability of a broadband power module whose operational frequency range falls right into the high VHF TV band (channels 7-13), a 25 watt TV transmitter can be achieved by driving the module with a surplus cable TV modulator. A channel 12 modulator was purchased locally for $10 which is an average price. Frequency agile units cost a bit more but have the advantage of operating on all the channels.

In any case, initial results for a 25 watt transmitter show that a good quality signal can be sent for a distance of about 4 miles, depending on terrain, height of antenna, the degreee of urban clutter and the antenna design. In an urban area, 4 miles translates to a lot of folks within the coverage area.

It looks like we will be able to supply the 25 watt power module as a kit for around $100 or so. Provided you can find a surplus modulator, a transmiter can be built for less than $200. Even if you had to buy a new modulator, the cost would be under $500. Antennas are not too hard to build, one of our folks is working on some easy to construct designs at the moment.

As far as content goes, there are so many independent documentaries and other films available, you could keep a 5 or 6 disk DVD player full all the time. Just feed the output to the modulator.

In regards to a national network for distribution, it already exists. Free Speech TV has a channel on the Dish network. Also, there is World Link which is on both Dish and Direct. You could feed the video live from the dish receiver to the transmitter. For free programming, set up a 30-36 inch KU band dish and receiver to get the free to air programming from Telstar 5. There are dozens of channels available, a whole bunch from the mideast. Add a DVR unit, either standalone or PC based, to record the programming. More than enough material to keep a community engaged.

Posted by: Stephen Dunifer at September 17, 2004 09:00 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?