It is often proposed that the media should be targeted for disruption because it plays a crucial propaganda role not only in supporting regimes like the coup, but also because it actively promotes anti-Islamic values and immorality.
Here it is important to understand that the media is a mouthpiece of power, it is not the power itself.
Either we are talking about corporate-sponsored or government-sponsored media (which generally comes to the same thing). If we are talking about advertising-based media, obviously, programming will support the agendas of advertisers. If we are talking about government-funded media, it will be used to promote the government’s narrative.
I do not see any particular benefit to targeting subordinate institutions.
Even if you target them, they will continue to broadcast the propaganda of their sponsors; because they must.
There is no avoiding the ultimate reality that if you want to influence the media, you need to influence those who control it.
If rebels conclude that it is useful to disrupt, for example, the Media City, you should focus on those elements of its system which allow it to function.
As a facility, that can mean obvious things like electricity and water. As a system, that can mean indirect elements like their ability to recruit advertisers. If companies that advertise on the channels produced at Media City are punished, this will impact production.
Still, in my opinion, something like this is a secondary target, and possibly a distraction from meaningful disruption of power.