OWS, The New York Times, CNN, HULU and RT

The map on the left was published on a business web site to indicate locations around the globe that were planning to participate in the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement on Saturday, October 15th. (Here the color red, currently being borrowed by the Orwellian sages in the Republican Party and an obedient mainstream media to indicate the party's areas of domination and influence, seems to revert to its more traditional symbolism of standing for the dread forces of rebellion and revolution...reminiscent of the Brezhnev years when American journals like Time, Newsweek and News and World Report would show the threat of communism engulfing the entire globe in large pools of red, no?) A form of globalization that I can live with seems to be taking place right now, one that the IMF, the World Bank, the ITO and Tom Friedman may not find so appealing. Will something substantial come of this? Much is made by the usual talking heads in the media of the OWS folks not having a list of demands. I found --in a stunning epiphany that might have come from the mind of Marshal McLuhan--that the mere act of trying to follow what is going on with the movement and the protests taking place is itself enough to reveal, for me, at least, what makes me angry enough to take to the streets and join in the protests.

Let me walk you through my experience. I relied, as many now do, on the internet to obtain information, and since I am still mainstream enough to continue to accept the New York Times as the "newspaper of record," I first went to its web page. But, oh, that would not work. I had forgotten that the Times no longer gives me access to its news stories at the moment since I have "used up" the limit of 20 articles for the month it imposes on all who do not pay for its services. The electronic version of the paper had already been drowning in advertising. On a given day, the site may open with a full page ad as a preface to actual news. On each and every day, there is a large, often animated, ad just beneath the paper's banner. Though sorely tested by the paper's new policy, I have so far held out. I will not subscribe--even if it means giving up the secret, nasty pleasure I have taken in posting my responses to such as Paul Krugman and David Brooks and counting the "recs" my efforts had elicited. (Range: zero to over 600.)

I then went to CNN.com where once again, each sound bite was prefaced by what seemed an interminable commercial. It was the last straw. "Doesn't take much," you may say, "to set you off, does it?" You see, something had happened earlier in the evening that served to really take me to the edge. Prior to resorting to the internet, I had turned to Channel 75 on my shiny new HD television set so that I could watch Amy Goodman's Democracy Now, only to find I could no longer get Channel 75. What came on the screen was a scrambled picture accompanied by garbled sound. Must be a coincidence. Certainly, the cable provider wouldn't censor Amy.

Then, in a lapse of dedication to my task, I decided to console myself by catching up on an episode of my favorite BBC series, Doc Martin. I recalled a friend telling me that there was a site called "Hulu" that allows one to watch television shows on line. Of course, it was annoying to find that I had to "register" with Hulu before they would give me access, but I am getting used to jumping through this particular hurdle on the net. And, lo and behold, as they say, after entering Doc Martin in the seach box, a screen appeared that promised to make available to me all those episodes I had missed. Imagine my excitement. When I made my choice and double-clicked on a still from the show, it appeared to be loading rather quickly, and, although my pleasure sagged a bit after seeing a notice to the effect that there would be something like "light commercial interruption," my spirit rebounded at the strains of the show's theme music. Within moments, however, a commercial interrupted the program. Actually two commercials. I stuck with it, but my perserverance was rewarded with about eighteen commercials over the course of the program. Adding insult to this injury was a little message at the top of my screen that appeared with each commercial asking me, "Does this commercial interest you? Yes? No?" I, of course said no, and was assured that adjustments would be made. Within two or three minutes the very same commercials appeared on my screen. I made a note to myself to unsubscribe to Hulu as soon as I could stomach the process of doing so.

I then recalled that a friend had recommended RT as a news source, a media outlet that originates in Russia. There I found that--without any commercial interruption--no pop-up ads or similar distasteful phenomena, I could navigate through a number of news reports on what was happening right here in New York's Times Square as well as in several major cities around the world. RT had its version of the map that begins this piece, a clearer map showing that literally hundreds of cities were allying themselves with the stalwarts in Zucotti Park, even, it appears protesting under the umbrella label of Occupy Wall Street. How interesting, I thought, that after almost a century of communist rule, journalism coming out of Russia seemed so superior to anything our beloved homeland was turning out.

If there is any one aspect of life under latter-day capitalism that would send me out into the streets raising my voice in protest, it is the feeling that we are drowning, suffocating in advertising. And the more desperate the crisis in the capitalist realm, the more advertising is directed at us. Phrases from the past come in rushes--"the business of America is business," "what's good for General Motors is good for the country," an old boss who once told me, "If I wrapped a pile of manure attractively enough and put it in my store window, someone would buy it."

What is it the protesters want? Well, I can't speak for all of them, but I know what I want. I want to be free of advertising. I cannot recall a single television commercial I have ever seen, (and I must have seen about ten million since as a child I was entranced by such as Kukla, Fran and Ollie and the Ernie Kovack's morning show to become addicted to televison), that ever prompted me to buy anything. Not a single bar of soap. The endless stream of ads has only become more profuse since the Reagan era and the end of regulation. It has slowly creeped into what we still call public television. It takes up ever more space and pages in most printed matter, crowding out content, even merging with content to the point where one often finds it difficult to distinguish ads from content. It even tells us what drugs to urge on our physicians while pretending a kind of wholesome transparency by admitting of such side effects as sexual stimulation that may require emergency room care, blindness or death.

With what triumphant airs did we sing the praises of all those Coke and Marlboro and Benetton and McDonald's ads as they came to light up the Moscow streets. No longer would the soviet masses be condemned to their grey lives. Give them more plastic, more neon, more color. They're eating it up.

As for me, I'll take grey.