With more than 3,000 journalists, activists, bloggers and media critics having gathered in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform, it is clear that corporate press’ domination over the media is being challenged by a new media movement.

Whether it is well-known news sites like Democracy Now!, or lesser known activist groups like Reclaim the Media, a growing number of people are realizing that media democracy may be the most important issue in America – you can’t have an open or honest discussion about war, poverty or inequality unless the press properly covers them.

Perhaps one of the most interesting workshops at the conference was the ‘The Changing Role of Media Critics,’ with Janine Jackson from Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, Eric Boehlert from Media Matters, Diane Farsetta from the Center for Media and Democracy, and Eric Deggans from the St. Petersburg Times.

Each of the panellists talked about the need to understand the structural makeup of the media if we’re going to know how to fix it – you need to know who owns the newspaper you read, the newscast you watch, the blogpost you download and how they profit from it. This is what the media democracy movement is very good at. It continues to shine a light on media corporations and expose how a company like General Electric, which manufactures weapons, profits by having its news agency, NBC, promote the need for war in Iraq.

While there has been a lot of talk in both the alternative and mainstream press about how the media is in a state of crisis, the NCMR proved that there is hope. There is a dedicated base of people that understand the importance of having an accessible and democratic media and will continue to produce news no matter the financial restrictions.

However, the media democracy movement still has some fundamental problems that it needs to work out within itself if it’s going to succeed. The main problem is that the line between journalism and activism has become too blurry. The NCMR had many liberal activists who seemed more concerned about denouncing Republicans that practicing good journalism.

While Arianna Huffington claims the HuffingtonPost.com is non-partisan, she loses credibility (and independence) when she stands up on stage at the NCMR and tells attendees that they should do everything they can to ensure Barack Obama becomes the next president. People were very disturbed (and rightfully so) when Rupert Murdock endorsed George Bush. Why is it okay for liberals to do the same thing with Obama?

If the progressive press simply fawns over Obama for the next five months and vilifies everything John McCain does, then they will be following the exact formula they claim taints the corporate press. If they refuse to ask the hard and critical questions of their own leaders and their own movement, they will ultimately fail.

Media democracy has attracted people from all sides of the political spectrum (both Democrats and Republicans successfully fought together to defeat the Federal Communications Commission’s attempt to loosen media ownership laws). It has galvanized people across the world, from various economic and cultural backgrounds – people who once assumed that media reform simply meant changing the channel during the commercial.

A number of speakers at the conference talked about the issue of timing and how now was the right time to get the change they want to see. But media democracy is too important of an issue to be used to promote certain political beliefs.

The organizers of the NCMR, Free Press, have done an amazing job of keeping the media democracy movement non-partisan and working with all types of groups (brining mainstream news stalwart Dan Rather on board is a testament to the movement’s growth and success). While activism certainly plays an important and necessary role in brining issues such as media concentration and net neutrality to light and pulling back the curtain on the corporate press, the movement must also ensure its followers practice good journalism, or pull back the curtain on them.

Drawing comparisons between media democracy and his own family’s struggle with addiction, PBS journalist Bill Moyers pointedly told attendees at the National Conference for Media Reform that, “what you don’t know can kill you.”

Unaware of his own son’s drug addiction, Moyers had to face the harsh and horrible reality that addiction can bring to a family and worked with his son to help overcome his illness. Likewise, Moyers said the corporate media’s addiction to repeating the spin of the government is a devastating illness that impacts an entire nation.

While there have been a lot of focus at the NCMR about how to reclaim the media, Moyers gave a passionate speech on Saturday morning reiterating why it is so important for independent journalists to break this cycle of addiction.

Bill Moyers

There is still no greater example of how the corporate media’s out-of-control addiction cost lives than during its coverage of the lead-up to the Iraq War. Once the media got in bed with the Bush administration, they couldn’t get out and ask the tough questions about what was really going on. Since the war started, up to a million Iraqis have died and the foundation for the Iraq invasion has been proven to be a lie.

Moyers’ documentary about the media’s role in Iraq gives a disturbing look at just how complicit the media was during that time.

At the end of his speech Moyers pushed the responsibility to break this cycle of abuse onto the independent media – no small task, he admitted, but a necessary one if we are going to save lives.

You can follow the updates from the conference at twitter.com/adbuster

It’s the million dollar question: can the independent media create real change? There’s certainly no shortage of willing journalists and activists who want to create a powerful alternative to the corporate media’s myopic view, but with limited resources and so much competition, can small, independent media outlets actually have any impact?

It’s the question that was put to a panel at the National Conference of Media Reform today that included Robert Greenwald, president of Brave New Films; Jane Hamsher, founder of FireDogLake.com; Jefferson Morley, national editorial director for the Center for Independent Media; and Daisy Hernandez, managing editor of ColorLines magazine.

While the task may seem daunting, each member of the panel was able to give specific examples of how they were involved in a story or campaign that had an immediate impact in shaping the news and changing the debate in the mainstream media.

Perhaps the biggest example was Brave New Film and Mother Jones’ campaign to expose the controversial relationship of Republican presidential candidate John McCain and Reverend Rod Parsley. When campaigning in Ohio last February, McCain called Parsley “one of the truly great leaders in America, a moral compass, a spiritual guide.” But after posting a video on YouTube of some of Parsley’s sermons, in which he says Islam is “an anti-Christ religion that intends, through violence, to conquer the world,” McCain quickly had to reject Parsley’s endorsement.

While the video didn’t have the same impact as the Wright-Obama controversy, it showed how McCain has been shamelessly courting the fundamentalist Christian vote in order to become the next president and forced McCain to make a clear stand against the Islamic racism that is rampant in many parts of America.

Jane Hamsher talked about how one solitary blogger can also influence the national debate. As the founder of FireDogLake.com, a liberal blog site that became famous for its coverage of the Scotter Libby trail, Hamsher did a video report about John McCain’s shady campaign finance structure, which was then picked up by CNN. The story helped dispel the myth that has been circulating in the media that McCain is some kind of maverick for campaign reform.

But you don’t have to be an activist to create change. Jefferson Morley gave an example of how good old-fashioned journalism can still expose lies and corruption. A former staff member with the Washington Post, Morley changed sides and is now the national editorial director of the Center for Independent Media – which runs a number of independent news web sites across the country. His reporters have stuck to the basics of reporting and helped expose a private contractor who had worked in Iraq as nothing more than a fraud.

The one thing the panel didn’t necessarily show is whether independent media is having a deeper impact on the way people think about the issues and the power they are giving up. However, the examples from this group of panellists do show that the independent media is laying down the groundwork for a new type of media and is beginning to make some major dents in the amour of the corporate press.

You can follow the updates from the conference at twitter.com/adbuster