This lack of participation is, I fear, a common problem with anarchist journals and papers. While many people are happy to consume a product (in the shape of a paper or journal) and complain about what it does or does not carry, fewer seem to be willing to get involved in actually producing them. Which is a shame, as without people willing to contribute in some way (such as writing, distributing, selling, etc.) then the work is simply handed to a few people who, sooner or later, either get burnt out or find they cannot continue to do it.
This should not be the case as this consumerist mentality is totally against what anarchism stands for. Anarchism stands for mutual aid, participation, "doing it yourself." That should mean that anarchists should get involved in their media, whether it is selling it on demos or getting it into shops, writing reports on what they are doing or contributing articles on current events or anarchist theory and history. Yet this is not done as often as it should. I know that at times over the last year, Freedom editors have noted a lack of copy (this situation has improved) and a lack of help in doing the "boring" administrative tasks necessary to distribute the paper or maintain the bookshop. As far as Black Flag goes, we get better responses from comrades in other countries for articles than in the UK.
Yes, I know that the movement is not made up of "professional revolutionaries" and does not have full-timers. And it's a good job that is the case -- we are (usually) normal people trying to make the world better and long may it remain so. But correlated with this is the necessity of an increased sense of personal responsibility. The simple fact is that without active participation our media will die.
So the question is, if you like Black Flag and want to see it keep going consider getting involved in it. You don't need to be a writer, we just need people willing to do the many tasks required to produce and distribute any journal.
Of course, keeping Black Flag going does not address the wider subject of what the anarchist media should be doing. I think it could do a lot better. One good sign is that Freedom has become, at long last, a proper anarchist paper. Having a regular, good quality, newspaper is a boon to the movement and it's a resource we should ensure continues and grows.
However, looking at the other journals we could have, we are sorely lacking. We have three magazines (Direct Action, Organise! and Black Flag) all of which do roughly the same thing. That is a needless duplication. Why have three magazines with three editorial teams when one magazine could be used to complement Freedom with more in depth articles and analysis? By combining into one journal, we could increase its size, print run, regularity and pool of available articles and people willing to read and sell it. While I would prefer the title of any such journal to be Black Flag, I've aware that Direct Action is the most regular of the existing magazines and it would be more sensible to build on that success.
As well as a single quarterly (or even monthly!) magazine, we could also do with a yearly (or more frequent) journal along the lines of the old "Cienfuegos Anarchist Press Review." As well as reprinting the best of anarchist writing (both from home and abroad) in the previous year, it could be the home of longer pieces on theory and history (whether classic reprints or new material). This could be called Black Flag (no surprises there!).
Then there is the pressing need for a free sheet for handing out at demos and elsewhere. Free sheets are essential means of getting our ideas across to people who then may be interested in getting involved in the movement. A free sheet which is regularly produced and distributed widely would raise interest in our ideas immensely. Something along the lines of the AF's Resistance would be the obvious choice, particularly as none of the other federation's free sheets are as regular or well-known.
Now I know that there may be a lot of resistance to such a proposal. It would involve some organisations working more closely together and dropping some of the minor differences between them. For example, the SolFed and AF would have to stop being divided over whether a (non-existent) syndicalist union would be better than a (non-existent) workplace resistance group and concentrate on what unites them (i.e. revolutionary anarchism). It would mean an outward looking attitude rather than the (often self-destructive) inward looking mentality we, as a movement, sometimes express. It would mean, basically, creating a media for the movement we could have (and should have). And it would mean objectively looking at the movement as it is now and seeing where it is wasting energy and resources in needless duplication.
Of course, this could be part of a wider gathering of forces. The creation of a single anarchist federation to support this unified media would make sense. This would involve creating a more inclusive AF which drops some of its controversial positions and language (for example, who cares if it's called a union or a workplace assembly if it is for direct action and self-management?). The opening of the SolFed's Industrial Networks to all rebel workers rather than just SolFed members would also make sense (and this would be the IWA affiliate in the UK). That would complete a united media.
In a nutshell, I think we should be practicing more mutual aid then we have been. If we do, I think we would reap the benefits in terms of both a healthy and respected anarchist media and a more dynamic and growing movement. Needless to say, those who think this is a good idea should plough on and start the ball rolling.
There will be a meeting at the bookfair on this subject so please come along and discuss the points I have raised. Or perhaps we can discuss it in the pages of Freedom. What happens next is in your hands.