Reporting the Unpopular

Ever heard of Antiwar.com or American Conservative?

Probably not unless you're one of the very few people who search for, "non-mainstream" news sources. These two websites report on current events and their relation to war efforts around the world. The American Conservative mostly reports on global war conflicts in relation to their threat toward the United States. Antiwar.com reports on current war efforts from around the world. Both sources attempt to analyze the situation and determine the impact. 

Top issues currently being reported by American Conservative and Antiwar.com: 

• The United States causing threats to spark a war with Russia.
• The United States determines that China is the biggest threat to U.S. National Security.
• Syria requests compensation from the U.S. for 7 years of war.

One of CNN's top stories today is, "What Black drivers are doing to protect themselves during traffic stops." One of the top stories today on Fox News is, "House Republicans display Kamala Harris milk cartoon at news conference: 'Missing at the border." We will not hear antiwar voices or important global topics on the mainstream news unless it fits with the network's narrative. 

Why can't I hear antiwar voices from mainstream news?

Let's begin with who controls the mainstream news. Typically private individuals and corporations own mainstream media outlets.  Warren Buffet and Jeff Bezos are just two examples of individuals who own U.S. news outlets. The media corporations do as they are told in order to be funded by these billionaires or powerful corporations. The mainstream media and everyone involved are all about... MONEY, MONEY, MONEY. This means they will report on whatever news content gets them the most viewers. For example, viewers of Fox News clearly have high engagement rates with content scrutinizing Vice President Kamala Harris. Therefore, Fox News will report on said content even when the beginnings of a potential WWIII are on the rise. 

Part of the problem could be the source of funding of the news. The U.S. system is different from other countries like England, where the BBC is powered by the Royal Charter under a British government agency. The BBC is considered a public service provider and typically has a low level of political bias. Of course, being funded by the government can have its cons when it comes to reporting on specific content. For example, if a news outlet was funded by its government, it may be limited to refraining from speaking out against its government.

What do we do to fix this? 

The reality is, we won't be able to necessarily change the content that the mainstream media report on. What we can do is get out of our content-comfort zones and explore alternative outlets. American Conservative and Antiwar.com are alternative outlets that will provide a perspective that is not typically shown in the media. Outlets that aren't powered by big money are able to report on content that isn't intended to please everyone. Raw facts and opposing opinions are able to be shared and provide multiple perspectives on current events. 

While searching for alternative outlets, always be cautious of the credibility of the content and the source. It is important that our society pops our filter bubbles and gets exposed to opposing ideas.