Talk:Alternative press (U.S. political left)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article refers to a periodical that doesn't have its ISSN information listed. If you can, please provide it.

Contents

[edit] Linking to the papers

How do people feel about adding links to the publications from the text? It would look something like this:

This would be awkward if a Workers Vanguard entry was created down the road. 05:17, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'd go for

or

or even


I think it is a great idea. I created the page as part of an expansion of pages on the alternative and underground press and media (left and right), and hoped people would jump in and add stuff just like this. I don't know if there is a format preference for such things on Wikipedia. They all look OK to me. Thanks for doing it. --Cberlet 12:52, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)


The last option looks best, but if very many are available online and it looks messy, we'll simplify.

I've added a few labor, party and community papers referenced in the Walter Reuther Library Archives at Wayne State.

I agree this is a worthwhile project. Its my pleasure to post these things where others will see them. If you have an old copy of one of these papers, could you scan and post the image? T DJ Silverfish 17:28, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hah! you figured out my plan. I work at a library/archive and have hundreds of these periodicals going back 50 years. I need to figure out how images get put on Wikipedia first, however. Any clues for short cuts? I plan to make the images available to the public.--Cberlet 22:55, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Sadly, there is no shortcut. And because these will presumably only be fair use, you'll need to keep them in the English Wikipedia, not the Commons
You upload from Special:Upload. I think it should be self-explanatory (if a bit tedious). -- Jmabel | Talk 23:52, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
I created a template etc. for images of Newspaper covers, but I am off to Boulder to the World Affairs Conference so no uploads for a bit. Thanks for the tips.
Category:Fair use newspaper covers
Template:Newspapercover
Hope this is correct. --Cberlet 00:08, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Online only?

Do we want to cover online-only publications? Someone recently added (and I removed) Currents of Awareness; they placed it at the head of the list of magazines, which is certainly not where it belongs. Should we start a new section, or does this belong in a different article? I'm a little afraid of this becoming a link repository. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:38, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

As it stands, this article is clearly labeled as print only, with alternative media available for non-print publications (and broadcasts?). "Currents of Awareness" is already there--it was also added to Underground press, where it clearly had no business. BTfromLA 22:16, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Currents of Awareness was more like a web reprint. It could go in an entry for lefty news blogs, I suppose, including things like Swans, but not Counterpunch. The page List of left-wing publications in the United Kingdom could act as a guide reorganizing this page in the meantime. DJ Silverfish 00:23, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Left Nationalist publications

I've considered adding a subcategory for Left Nationalist publications. This would include the Crusader. If you were to include A. Philip Randolph's The Messenger and the NAACP's Crisis then the category would have to be called something else. African American political publications maybe.

Garvey's Negro World and the Nation of Islam's The Final Call may not belong in this category, but they would belong somewhere. Where? DJ Silverfish 21:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Is it accurate to describe the Nation of Islam as "leftist"? BTfromLA 04:36, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Not at all. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:07, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • NAACP, a civil rights organization, is not "nationalist" whatever that means. Among left circles "nationalist" usually refers to someone who is right-wing, when it could be possibly applied to leftists it is usually those leftists who support independence of a region from a country I believe. --Revolución (talk) 02:05, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
    • The NAACP is not nationalist in any sense. However, nationalist is not necessarily right-wing. Generally, in the U.S., a Black Nationalist would tend to be on the left (but the NAACP is not Black Nationalist, and the Nation of Islam is not really on the left). -- Jmabel | Talk 07:19, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Village Voice

The Village Voice seems an odd inclusion. It's no longer particularly "left" as alternative weeklies go, though I suppose it was until maybe about 1980. Still, like most contemporary "alternative weeklies" it is really something of a different phenomenon than most of what is listed here. If we are going to list is, we should also list things like the (Seattle) Stranger and the Boston Phoenix, but I think it would make more sense to drop the Voice. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I've always thought of the "Voice" as left-leaning in their political commentary, at least as much as the "Phoenix." The only reason I didn't include the "Phoenix" and other big city alt-weeklys as well is because the "Voice" has a considerable readership outside of New York. However, if you strongly feel like it shouldn't be included, I'm not married to the idea of it being there. But if you feel like adding the others I'm open to that as well. --Fearfulsymmetry | Talk 17:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
It's a matter of "left of what". Left of center, certainly. And, as I said, 25+ years ago certainly on the left. But now? (Maybe I should say "since they fired Alex Cockburn in 1983?) It seems to me to be pretty much in the mainstream of American liberalism, which is really not what this page is about.
But I haven't lived in NYC in a long time, and I have to admit to not having much read the Voice lately. I'd appreciate a knowledgable third opinion. - Jmabel | Talk 05:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
The Village Voice is alternative in many aspects, but I don't think of it is part of the "political left." Perhaps we need to clarify, but I thought the page was for publications that see themselves as part of a broader political movement. The same is true for the Boston Phoenix and other alternative newsweeklies (often members of the [AAN])). I have recreated the page Alternative press and suggest we list them on that page. When someone deleted that page and made it a disambig page that pointed to Alternative media it created part of the problem. These types of alternative publications do need a page, and the list can be expanded over there. At least that seems like the logical compromise to me. If others agree, we can add a pointer on this page to Alternative press and say the list is there. That was my original idea when I creted this and the other pages.--Cberlet 14:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I concur about the political stance of the Voice et alia and the recreation of a new page to clasify them. The editorial stance of the Voice has been more contrarian than Left for many years. It frequently publishes articles that are more provocative than coherent, especially in the arts pages. Seems like a stepping stone for pomo conservative cultural critics like Norah Vincent on their way to becoming the next Camille Paglia. Just an opinion, but one based on years of reading. DJ Silverfish 22:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem with that. Sorry for all the confusion. -- Fearfulsymmetry 02:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to remove it. And, yes, there should be a List of U.S. alternative weekly newspapers, or some such. - Jmabel | Talk 22:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I need more sleep. The list already exists at: alternative weekly newspapers --Cberlet 22:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Democracy Now did an excelent report on the Village Voice this morning (April 13, 2006). Here are the relevant links, which I've already added to the VV and James Ridgeway pages:

DJ Silverfish 17:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/l/t/Talk%7EAlternative_press_%28U.S._political_left%29_1540.html"