Counterfire.org (UK) broadsheet

[The Idler]

Counterfire.org (http://counterfire.org/) (UK) have just published a broadsheet (albeit only 3 or so pages of actual text) on their website which is print-on-demand. Is this the future of left newspapers?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Hope not!

[Sam_b]

This being the 'future of left newspapers' would be completely missing the key point of newspapers within our movement as a tool of agitation and building.

[Martin Blank]

Counterfire.org (http://counterfire.org/) (UK) have just published a broadsheet (albeit only 3 or so pages of actual text) on their website which is print-on-demand. Is this the future of left newspapers?

No, but sites like this will become more common as a means of presentation for magazines and similar print publications on the Internet. It is not viable for a newspaper except as an archive (no one is going to pay $6 for a printed four-page full-color newspaper from this site). That can just as easily be accomplished with a PDF archive on a website.

I do think, though, that the age of the newspaper is at an end (a hard thing for me to say, given how long I've worked on newspapers). The high price of newsprint and maintaining large printing presses, as well as the rise of the Internet, have made it a dying industry. But we are a long way away from a viable online, electronic substitute for newspapers.

Until we reach a point where electronic readers (similar to iPads, Galaxy tablets, etc.) are easily and cheaply purchased (we're talking under $50, including online access), and the cost of downloads are less than what people currently pay for a newspaper, a print publication will still be the most effective format -- the lowest common denominator -- for being able to reach everyone. But I think we'll see a shift first to more affordable ad hoc and on-demand methods (e.g., xeroxing) before full transition to purely electronic dissemination is possible.

[blake 3:17]

Site here: http://counterfire.org/

Makes sense to me. I don't see any sense in publishing some blah blah paper that just ends up in the garbage. And I write this as somebody who publishes print material.

It makes way more sense to make an effective leaflet, poster or sticker, make a good website, and publish books of varying size that have a longer shelf life and have some substance to them.

There's nobody in the Global North lacking in an excess paper. It also makes way more sense for doing "propaganda" work to learn to write for the web.

A friend who'd spent a lot of time in Bolivian mining communities told me a bout how the anarchists just absolutely laughed at the Trotskyist obsession with publishing newspapers. In the mining towns, radio and dynamite were the most effective media.

[blake 3:17]

Misread OP. My apologies.


Counterfire.org (http://www.anonym.to/?http://counterfire.org/) (UK) have just published a broadsheet (albeit only 3 or so pages of actual text) on their website which is print-on-demand. Is this the future of left newspapers?

But it makes sense. Ten years ago, Solidarity in the US were doing a small paper that was a free download and printer friendly. It was great. Way cheaper and easier than shipping out of date papers around.

I think there is a place for papers and magazines in both general and specific ways. The free local arts/leftish weeklies here I now read and put back in the pile. If I need to look details up I go on line. My collective house subscribes to two daily nespapers, but that makes sense given the number of people reading them.

I personally subscribe to a few magazines, but they are ones that have content worth keeping for reference.

[Sam_b]

I think you're missing the point slightly. The point that should be made is questioning how rewvolutionary organisations build in communities and among activist networks, in order to strengthen our class and the ideological position it takes. Newspaper content is of course one of these things, and it doesn't hurt to have it online or whatever, but it's crucial to remember the act of the newspaper itself: as a starting point for establishing contacts and getting into political discussions through the physical act of distribution or selling.

People buying or subscribing to papers is fine, but i'd much rather be on a stall with our publication using this as a jumping off point to get into a conversation with people, to hear what they are angry about, and trying to win them over to a revolutionary position. I don't think this can always be done by just the content alone.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Oh trots and your newspapers.

[Sam_b]

Great contribution. By the way, I saw a member of AFed using their publication as an agitational tool during the student stuff. Anything to add?

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Great contribution. By the way, I saw a member of AFed using their publication as an agitational tool during the student stuff. Anything to add?

Not in AFed. And there really is no point discussing the SWP or there tactics with you, since you mindlessly tow the CC line.

[Lyev]

Not in AFed. And there really is no point discussing the SWP or there tactics with you, since you mindlessly tow the CC line.This is a concise analysis. Thanks

I think the Socialist Party now does a month's worth of newspaper in PDF. on our website (so 4 papers). Something I discussed with some guys recently, is that for a mere point of practicality, it is much much easier to bring papers to a demonstration or intervention rather than take a laptop along to show someone an interesting or relevant article, obviously. And personally, I have always preferred reading something tangible; staring at a screen too long hurts my eyes.

Another key thing about a revolutionary organisation's paper is that it has a slogan clearly printed on the front. Perhaps, if the government has just been discussing child benefit, the headline in big bold font that will dominate the newspaper's front page will be on that subject. For example, this worked particularly well after the Palestine aid-flotilla incident, and it does with similar events, and recently on student marches this technique (e.g., simply, "Fight the rise in the fees" or something similar) has been useful for grabbing attention.

Contrast this with a group like the Spartacist League - I know, a very extreme example, but I'm trying to prove a point here - who, on those same demos, had nothing in their paper about fees or, indeed, domestic UK politics, but articles about Sri Lanka, Marxism's relations to the enlightenment; their front page was on the Irish banking crisis (which are of course important, but not exactly pressing issues for your average college student). This is most certainly not the way to use a newspaper as an organ of the party and as a way of communicating relevant ideas. And as Sam mentions, it's a good springboard for attracting attention to an issue, getting your points across and drawing in someone's interest.

[Quail]

In response to the OP, I think that there will always be room for paper publications. They're useful when we do stalls, and good to distribute to people who otherwise wouldn't bother looking up our website. They also spread awareness of the organisation. There's obviously nothing wrong with having them online too and distributed via a mailing list. I think though that papers are important as a way of spreading the word, provided that pushing the paper doesn't take priority over more important things, such as supporting a struggle.

[Sam_b]

Not in AFed. And there really is no point discussing the SWP or there tactics with you, since you mindlessly tow the CC line.

Didn't say you were in AFed.

Seeing as you know so much about me and my relation to the Central Committee, do you mind filling in for everyone my position with regards to the Neil Davidson document and the Democracy Commission within the party? Surely you're not just saying something with no basis in an attempt to troll?

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Didn't say you were in AFed.

Seeing as you know so much about me and my relation to the Central Committee, do you mind filling in for everyone my position with regards to the Neil Davidson document and the Demcracy Commission within the party? Surely you're not just saying something with no basis in an attempt to troll?

Me, troll? Never..

[blake 3:17]

Newspaper content is of course one of these things, and it doesn't hurt to have it online or whatever, but it's crucial to remember the act of the newspaper itself: as a starting point for establishing contacts and getting into political discussions through the physical act of distribution or selling.


I understand where you're coming from. My grouplet joined a split from the IST section here and folks were well versed in the virtues of paper selling. At certain points it was an effective tactic for talking to people about broader issues and also involving contacts and fellow travellers as contributors.

I'm not convinced in this day and age. Usually I felt I could write the national Socialist Worker in my sleep -- most of the content pretty obvious to anyone who followed the news and had a basic Marxist/Left analysis.

The section here has seemed to have stopped selling papers -- I think they still publish but not so regularly.


They're useful when we do stalls, and good to distribute to people who otherwise wouldn't bother looking up our website. They also spread awareness of the organisation. There's obviously nothing wrong with having them online too and distributed via a mailing list. I think though that papers are important as a way of spreading the word, provided that pushing the paper doesn't take priority over more important things, such as supporting a struggle.

I have no problem with folks doing publications, I love em! It's a problem when the paper sale assumes the primary activity.

I've met with comrades from the Middle East and Latin America where paper sales ARE NOT A POSSIBILITY! In those cases, people usually print leaflets and drop them or throw them in the air at rallies or pickets. As Brecht put it, leave no traces.

[Die Neue Zeit]

But we are a long way away from a viable online, electronic substitute for newspapers.

Until we reach a point where electronic readers (similar to iPads, Galaxy tablets, etc.) are easily and cheaply purchased (we're talking under $50, including online access), and the cost of downloads are less than what people currently pay for a newspaper, a print publication will still be the most effective format -- the lowest common denominator -- for being able to reach everyone. But I think we'll see a shift first to more affordable ad hoc and on-demand methods (e.g., xeroxing) before full transition to purely electronic dissemination is possible.

OK, you and other comrades really need to critique me personally on this!

I don't have difficulty reading stuff online for hours on end (no headaches or dizziness, in contrast to modern video games). What advantages do electronic readers have for eyesight, specifically?

Also, forums give opportunities to write stuff in quick response (i.e., discussions). Paper newspapers don't.


It makes way more sense to make an effective leaflet, poster or sticker, make a good website, and publish books of varying size that have a longer shelf life and have some substance to them.


as a starting point for establishing contacts and getting into political discussions through the physical act of distribution or selling.

People buying or subscribing to papers is fine, but i'd much rather be on a stall with our publication using this as a jumping off point to get into a conversation with people, to hear what they are angry about, and trying to win them over to a revolutionary position. I don't think this can always be done by just the content alone.

For the sake of agitation, wouldn't it be more cost-effective to have something the size of a business/calling card in handy to distribute en masse?

You can encapsulate the main points of leaflets, posters, stickers, etc. in a business/calling card to distribute. How ironic I'm using the business/calling card analogy, because there was a Weekly Worker debate wherein a newspaper proponent called political newspapers a calling card of sorts.

The business/calling card can then be a jumping point for Sam B's beloved discussions. ;)

[Sam_b]

For the sake of agitation, wouldn't it be more cost-effective to have something the size of a business/calling card in handy to distribute en masse?

You can encapsulate the main points of leaflets, posters, stickers, etc. in a business/calling card to distribute. How ironic I'm using the business/calling card analogy, because there was a Weekly Worker debate wherein a newspaper proponent called political newspapers a calling card of sorts.

I disagree here. A newspaper is a much more tangeable and effective method in my experience. Leaflets and cards are something to hand out en masse, but am I looking for an en masse distribution with regards to the newspaper tactic? Not necessarily. When I am on a stall the newspaper provides an avenue to approach people and raise issues that are being reported on in Socialist Worker or whatever. The job here is to get a dialogue going, not merely to sell the paper but to sell the idea of revolutionary change. From what i've seen, more people have gotten involved, with our organisation at least, by getting them involved in a conversation and hearing where they stand on issues.

This, by the way, is not exclusively a paper tactic alone - petitions on stalls also start as a jump off in engagement. This is one of the ways our Anti Cuts Action Network has amassed support on campus.

As important as content also is, one of the essentials is a 'Where We Stand' subsection which abbreviates our main organisational and theoretical points.

[Kotze]

For the sake of agitation, wouldn't it be more cost-effective to have something the size of a business/calling card in handy to distribute en masse?Like this?
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1307/5181664403_8e441ff0d6_z.jpg
From 1997 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottishpoliticalarchive/5181664403/).

I agree that it's good marketing. The SPD did a few in 1998. (I think they lied about basically everything though.)

[Sam_b]

Thinking about what i've just said, I think the newspapers also help in raising the confidence of younger and inexperienced comrades to have political discussions with the public and such, and gets them familiar with what arguments will be encountered along the way. I don't want it to sound like the be all and end all of party organisation, but it is important nonetheless. I think Lenin suggests this when discussing the role of the revolutionary paper as something encompassing, as the 'collective organiser' and "scaffolding" around how a revolutionary movement is built.

[Devrim]

I've met with comrades from the Middle East and Latin America where paper sales ARE NOT A POSSIBILITY! In those cases, people usually print leaflets and drop them or throw them in the air at rallies or pickets. As Brecht put it, leave no traces.


I disagree here. A newspaper is a much more tangeable and effective method in my experience. Leaflets and cards are something to hand out en masse, but am I looking for an en masse distribution with regards to the newspaper tactic? Not necessarily. When I am on a stall the newspaper provides an avenue to approach people and raise issues that are being reported on in Socialist Worker or whatever. The job here is to get a dialogue going, not merely to sell the paper but to sell the idea of revolutionary change. From what i've seen, more people have gotten involved, with our organisation at least, by getting them involved in a conversation and hearing where they stand on issues.

I think that a lot of the criticism of the SWP over selling papers comes down to jealousy. The SWP has an attractive well produced weekly newspaper, and to be honest I wish we had one too. We don't, our paper in the UK is monthly, and nowhere near as well produced on a technical level.

This being said of course it would still be possible to argue that the SWP puts too much emphasis on selling the paper, but really the argument must be put in the context of its activities overall. Everything that you do as an organisation of course means that there are things that you can not do. If you think that the SWP spends too much time selling the paper to the detriment of cadre development for example then that is a valid point. However, I think that you have to recognise that to a certain extent this is a 'grand strategic' decision. Once you have decided that you will have a weekly newspaper, you have to sell it.

I think, or at least when I was working in London it was true, the SWP has three publications, its paper, a glossy monthly, and a quarterly international theoretical journal. It is impressive. As I said before, I wish we had the same capacity.

Of course, organisations have to decide how to use their resources, and for the SWP with its membership in four figures the actual production of these publications isn't that much of a burden. The distribution of course places a workload on the entire membership.

Something that has always struck me as impressive is how a tiny organisation, with membership in two figures, like the CPGB also manages to produce a weekly.

Having said that I think that changes is technology do mean that we have to reassess how we organise our propaganda. Also it is something where will will find national differences due to the size of different sections and the laws in particular countries.

Sam talks about how the paper gets people into conversations, and I appreciate what he means. For us though a leaflet serves a similar purpose. Firstly because our paper isn't weekly it obviously won't be as up-to-date as the latest SW whereas the leaflet addresses the concerns of the day, but also due to the fact that there are far few leaflets given out on political demonstrations in Turkey when compared to England. I have been on demonstrations in England and come home with enough paper to reconstitute a forest. On a workers demonstration in Ankara, you might get two or three leaflets. People form an orderly queue and it is difficult to give them out fast enough. We try to have people giving out leaflets in pairs, one doing handing out, one doing talking.

Of course we have to reconsider the role of print publications in the light of the internet, but that doesn't mean saying let's abandon print publications. If it is not technically practical to produce, and distribute a weekly paper, which for many organisations it isn't, it doesn't mean that we should explain our lack of resources by deciding that we will do stuff on line.

I would imagine that the people who are producing 'Counterfire', who as I understand it are a split from the SWP, would love to have a weekly, and that they are doing this because they don't have the resources to have one.

It is a mistake to make virtues out of necessities.

Devrim

[Devrim]

I think though that papers are important as a way of spreading the word, provided that pushing the paper doesn't take priority over more important things, such as supporting a struggle.

What does supporting the struggle mean? For revolutionaries surely we see ourselves as having a political role within struggles, and there are definite points that we want to advocate, such as, as an example of one that I think we would agree on, the idea that workers need to control their own struggles.

Surely the paper and leaflets have a definite role to play in spreading these ideas. In any struggle surely we sell more papers and give out more leaflets than we get to talk to individuals.

Devrim

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

I think Lenin suggests this when discussing the role of the revolutionary paper as something encompassing, as the 'collective organiser' and "scaffolding" around how a revolutionary movement is built.

"The necessity to concentrate all forces on establishing a regularly appearing and regularly delivered organ arises out of the peculiar situation of Russian Social-Democracy as compared with that of Social-Democracy in other European countries and with that of the old Russian revolutionary parties. Apart from newspapers, the workers of Germany, France etc. have numerous other means for the public manifestation of their activity, for organising the movement -- parliamentary activity, election agitation, public meetings, participation in local public bodies (rural and urban), the open conduct of trade unions (professional, guild), etc., etc. In place of all that, yes, all of that, we must be served -- until we have won political liberty -- by a revolutionary newspaper, without which no broad organisation of the working-class movement is possible." - Lenin

[Quail]

What does supporting the struggle mean? For revolutionaries surely we see ourselves as having a political role within struggles, and there are definite points that we want to advocate, such as, as an example of one that I think we would agree on, the idea that workers need to control their own struggles.

Surely the paper and leaflets have a definite role to play in spreading these ideas. In any struggle surely we sell more papers and give out more leaflets than we get to talk to individuals.

Devrim

I meant supporting a specific struggle. I've seen people so obsessed with flogging papers that they give the impression of caring more about that than the particular cause they're supporting on more than one occasion (the firefighters' strike and pretty much every demo outside the town hall, off the top of my head). I think it's offensive to the workers involved in a strike or whatever if an organisation uses that strike purely to promote themselves. In fact, the firefighters thanked AFed for not using every opportunity to push (well, distribute, since it's free) our paper.

[blake 3:17]

What if SW and SR were combined? I enjoy the stuff in SR -- more diversity of opinion and the timely stuff in SW could have more backgrounder stuff in it -- maps, timelines, etc. The member to reader ratio that's mentioned in WW article seems Maintaining three publications seems a bit too much. Anyways...

I'm absolutely in favour of print publications! I have far too many and have a pretty extensive archive. In the present situation I think it makes sense to focus on smaller flyers/broadsheets, lengthier pamphlets and small books, and making decent websites. A great many of the Left papers are just ugly and graphically dull. Interesting illustrations, photos and design can be way more effective in attracting people than blah blah writing. And again I read a lot of blahblah stuff.

DNZ's suggestion of a business card makes a lot of sense to me. Here in Toronto thre are a bunch of really interesting lefty silk screeners that do fabulous political posters, really gorgeous and very provocative. During certain periods -- during the strike waves in this part of Canada in the mid to late 90s -- papers did sell, but stickers, post cards, posters, buttons got all over the place. There are some really cool formats for making folded leaflets that can expand into a poster or a pretty detailed information sheet.

As part of the G20 defense work, folks made a T-shirt saying CO-CONSPIRATOR as a fundraiser. I love wearing it.

Edited to add:

I've seen people so obsessed with flogging papers that they give the impression of caring more about that than the particular cause they're supporting

It can also be an issue of lugging all the stuff around. I was in charge of distribution for one left paper, and man it was exhausting carrying all those boxes... And then if you're in the middle of a "scene" you gotta be worried about keeping all the stuff together, rather than what is going on.

[Devrim]

A great many of the Left papers are just ugly and graphically dull. Interesting illustrations, photos and design can be way more effective in attracting people than blah blah writing. And again I read a lot of blahblah stuff.

DNZ's suggestion of a business card makes a lot of sense to me. Here in Toronto thre are a bunch of really interesting lefty silk screeners that do fabulous political posters, really gorgeous and very provocative. During certain periods -- during the strike waves in this part of Canada in the mid to late 90s -- papers did sell, but stickers, post cards, posters, buttons got all over the place. There are some really cool formats for making folded leaflets that can expand into a poster or a pretty detailed information sheet.

As part of the G20 defense work, folks made a T-shirt saying CO-CONSPIRATOR as a fundraiser. I love wearing it.

I am not against "stickers, post cards, posters, buttons,...T-Shitsts" etc, but you can't explain much politics on them, which is surely the point of a paper.

Devrim

[Martin Blank]

OK, you and other comrades really need to critique me personally on this!

I don't have difficulty reading stuff online for hours on end (no headaches or dizziness, in contrast to modern video games). What advantages do electronic readers have for eyesight, specifically?

Also, forums give opportunities to write stuff in quick response (i.e., discussions). Paper newspapers don't.

I've had the opportunity to use the Times Reader 2.0, created by the New York Times for distribution, on the iPad. I tend to think that, if there is an archetype of what the paperless newspaper is going to look like, it will be a lot like that.

The advantage of the electronic reader is not that it's better on eyesight in comparison to a PC, but that it has the same portability a newspaper does. Here's what I mean:

If we suppose a time in the not-too-distant future where electronic news readers are universal and inexpensive (under $50; preferably $20 or less), the process of a "paper sale" would be a situation where someone approaches a distributor and requests/pays for a copy. The distributor then uses a small device (perhaps something like a flash drive or Micro SD card reader) to plug into the person's reader and download the issue. The person can then open up the file into a standardized reader program and use the touch screen to move through the articles. This could be done person-to-person at events, from literature tables or kiosks, or even online through the Internet.

The singular limitation to this technology would be transfer time, which would inevitably improve over the course of months or years. At the same time, the reader software could be used on desktops, laptops, smart phones, tablet pads, etc., and be cross-platform (Windows, Linux, Mac, Android, Chrome, etc.) so that issues can be moved from device to device. The electronic format could also integrate the paperless newspaper with an Internet website, online forums and message boards, etc.

When someone asks about the future of newspapers, this is what I see as the only viable option. And this is what I think of when someone asks if this is the future of newspapers.

[blake 3:17]

I am not against "stickers, post cards, posters, buttons,...T-Shitsts" etc, but you can't explain much politics on them, which is surely the point of a paper.


To quote myself, from the post you quoted: "In the present situation I think it makes sense to focus on smaller flyers/broadsheets, lengthier pamphlets and small books, and making decent websites."

[revolution inaction]

The advantage of the electronic reader is not that it's better on eyesight in comparison to a PC, but that it has the same portability a newspaper does. Here's what I mean:


i think e readers have better contrast then normal computer screens, which makes it much easier to read long bits of text on.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The advantage of the electronic reader is not that it's better on eyesight in comparison to a PC, but that it has the same portability a newspaper does.

In which case, forgive me for being off to lunch. So far, it seems that laptops are too bulky compared to electronic readers.

[Q]

i think e readers have better contrast then normal computer screens, which makes it much easier to read long bits of text on.
Yes, this is exactly the advantage of e-readers. It reads like paper.


In which case, forgive me for being off to lunch. So far, it seems that laptops are too bulky compared to electronic readers.

http://mediaday.nl/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/Press_BeBook_2_vierkant.jpg

http://www.ereaders.nl/images/big/hanlin_bebook.jpg

E-readers using such technologies (Strictly speaking an Ipad is not an e-reader, although it can be used as one) are still only in black/white, but colored technology is being developed and will probably be available within 5 years.

[The Idler]

I'm not talking about replacing newspapers in decline with purely electronic devices (which I think improbable speculation anyway), I'm talking about parties encouraging sympathisers to print them on demand, rather than running off large print runs themselves. Permanent Revolution, Socialist Worker and Morning Star (front page) all regularly publish PDFs of their periodicals on their website but don't encourage readers to print-and-share like Counterfire. You read about parties history and the struggling with print shops and expensive printers prior to around the 1990s. Foreign governments regularly subsidised Daily Worker and Newsline. SWP eventually had to give up their own printing equipment and contract it out. Hence why we now have a group encourage readers to print on demand and share as they see fit.

[Martin Blank]

I'm not talking about replacing newspapers in decline with purely electronic devices (which I think improbable speculation anyway), I'm talking about parties encouraging sympathisers to print them on demand, rather than running off large print runs themselves. Permanent Revolution, Socialist Worker and Morning Star (front page) all regularly publish PDFs of their periodicals on their website but don't encourage readers to print-and-share like Counterfire. You read about parties history and the struggling with print shops and expensive printers prior to around the 1990s. Foreign governments regularly subsidised Daily Worker and Newsline. SWP eventually had to give up their own printing equipment and contract it out. Hence why we now have a group encourage readers to print on demand and share as they see fit.

We encourage our members, supporters and friends to download and distribute the PDFed issues of Working People's Advocate as a means of circulation. We've been doing it from the beginning, and it is an effective method of expanding distribution.

[The Idler]

Will small decentralised print runs replace large centralised print runs?

[Martin Blank]

Will small decentralised print runs replace large centralised print runs?

In the end, I think it will be the viable "second option", especially for organizations without large bank accounts or the need for one. The price of newsprint has been skyrocketing since the 1980s, as have mailing costs. Owners of printing presses are not always too keen on printing radical or revolutionary newspapers, meaning that, unless you own your own presses (again, an increasingly expensive proposition), you have to take what you can get at whatever price they want to set.

On the other hand, the smaller, decentralized "on-demand" print runs can be done as needed (saving groups from the nightmare of having rooms full of unsold newspapers slowly moldering) for the same price or less, in comparison. The smaller, decentralized DIY method also allows for groups to produce more often, being able to respond in a more timely manner to events.

We do Working People's Advocate three times a week (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) this way. True, the paper is essentially a double-sided letter-size sheet in black-and-white, but we can respond quickly to unfolding events through a series of multiple articles than can other organizations, stuck with a printing schedule not necessarily chosen by them and having to sink hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars into each print run.

[sabotage]

i think pdfs of broadsheets are the wave of the future. for more theoretical compilations it'd be better to print journals/pamphlets. that and focusing on better websites like another commenter said.