Alternative Media or Authentic Media

What is alternative media? 

“Alternative media refers to media platforms that exist outside the mainstream media landscape, providing perspectives and information often considered radical or subversive”

Were you even aware of ‘Alt Media’ until Covid? 

The ‘alternative media’ landscape underwent a dramatic transformation during and after the COVID-19 global pandemic, evolving from a relatively unified front against mainstream narratives to a fragmented, ideologically divided space amid subsequent geopolitical conflicts.

During the height of the COVID-19 crisis (roughly 2020–2022), alternative media encompassed independent journalists, podcasters, YouTube channels, Substack writers, and outlets skeptical of official institutions. This relatively new forum for media experienced explosive growth. 

Lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and perceived censorship on big tech platforms drove millions to seek out voices challenging dominant public health narratives. What stood out was the apparent lack of clear political ideology dividing this space. Skeptics ranged from libertarian-leaning critics of government overreach to left-leaning voices concerned about corporate pharmaceutical influence and civil liberties. Anti-mandate protests and content often featured a cross-ideological coalition: right-leaning figures emphasizing individual freedom alongside left-leaning ones highlighting class issues or distrust of Big Pharma. This created a broad "anti-establishment" tent where right and left converged in opposition to perceived authoritarian measures, mainstream media complicity, and institutional failures.

The common enemy, centralised power and official narratives which temporarily overshadowed traditional left and right political divides.

We noticed that this unity began to fracture with Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The war reintroduced geopolitical fault lines that alternative media had largely been allowed to sidestep during Covid-19. Outlets and creators who had previously collaborated or shared audiences now split along predictable ideological lines. Some adopted pro-Western, pro-Ukraine stances, framing the conflict as a defence of democracy against authoritarian aggression. Others leaned toward anti-interventionist or pro-Russian narratives, emphasising NATO expansion, historical context in Donbas, or critiques of Western hypocrisy and escalation risks. 

At the same time, social media amplified these divisions: conservative-leaning users often expressing skepticism toward endless aid to Ukraine or highlighting alleged misinformation in Western coverage, while progressive or anti-imperialist voices critiqued U.S. foreign policy involvement. 

Studies of online discourse during this period show clear ideological sorting, with conservatives more likely to spread certain misinformation forms and liberals expressing stronger support for Ukraine. The result was heated arguments, unfollows, deplatforming’s within communities, and outright sabotage, such as boycotts, smear campaigns, or efforts to discredit former allies as "shills" or "controlled opposition."

The Israel-Gaza conflict, escalating dramatically after October 7, 2023 appeared to deepen these rifts further. Alternative media fractured along even sharper lines. Pro-Palestine voices, often from left-leaning or anti-imperialist corners highlighted civilian suffering, accusations of genocide, and critiques of Israeli policy and Western support. Pro-Israel perspectives, more common in right-leaning or centrist alternative spaces, focused on Hamas terrorism, self-defence rights, and threats to regional stability. This created intra-community clashes: former COVID-era allies accused each other of selective outrage, antisemitism, or Islamophobia. Polarization intensified on platforms, with echo chambers reinforcing one sided narratives and reducing cross-aisle dialogue. The "no obvious political ideology" era of alternative media seems distant.

A key factor in this shift would appear to be from financial pressures and the influence of wealthy funders. As alternative outlets grew during Covid-19, many transitioned from small donations or ads to larger-scale operations. Success bred dependency. Some creators and platforms attracted significant backing from rich individuals or organisations with specific agendas. Critics argue that "financial honey traps" emerged, including lucrative deals, sponsorships, or investments that subtly (or overtly) steered coverage toward certain geopolitical stances. Greed played a role: the incentive to maintain audience growth and revenue streams sometimes led to prioritizing donor-aligned narratives over independent inquiry. This dynamic appears to be eroding trust within the space, as accusations flew that outlets had been "captured" or "sold out," further fuelling infighting and fragmentation.

What is alternative media in 2026. Does being alternative guarantee the truth? Alternative media's Covid-19 era unity stemmed from a shared distrust of mainstream institutions in a health crisis affecting everyone similarly. Geopolitical wars like Ukraine-Russia and Israel-Gaza reimposed traditional ideological divides. Interventionism vs. isolationism, anti-imperialism vs. anti-authoritarianism, exacerbated by social media algorithms and funding realities. 

The result has been a more polarised, argumentative ecosystem, where former comrades now view each other with suspicion, and the promise of a truly independent, non-partisan alternative press feels increasingly elusive. This evolution reflects broader societal trends: when crises shift from universal (a pandemic) to selective (foreign wars), underlying political leanings resurface, often with greater intensity.