In Future Active: Media Activism and The Internet by Graham Meikle, the author shows by example how tactical media differs from alternative media forms because the former does not try to create a ‘better’ form or establish themselves through their form rather they are invested in creating “diverse responses to changing contexts.”
®TMark media aims to reclaim language from corporate appropriation, to draw attention to the system of corporate power, and to call attention to the US legal convention of corporate personhood, among other aims such as eliminating the principle of limited liability, which is an example of rhetoric behind ®TMark websites that take “advantage of the same loophole [as corporations], using their limited liability as a legally registered corporation to enable (non-life threatening) commercial sabotage.” The projects that are listed on the ®TMark website do raise questions concerning corporate rights and ascendancy.
®TMark website, gwbush.com, had ultimately proven what it sought to in provoking Bush and his administration: Bush could use his enormous network to ‘restrict freedom’ to a certain degree. “Of course, in taking this kind of retaliatory action, the Bush camp were coin gust what ®TMark wanted them to do.”
Tactical media is explained by Geert Lovink as a term that was proposed in 1992 to emphasize “the use of new technologies and temporary coalitions […] who are working both inside and outside the mainstream media,” thus, ®TMark consists of projects that use various forms of media for any given purpose.