In recent years a range of new alternative media outlets with a special focus on criticizing immigration politics and mainstream media, have emerged. The blog Avpixlat†, the online newspaper Fria†Tider†and the paper weekly Nya†Tider†are examples of media with quite different ideological profiles, but a clear and critical focus on immigration and mainstream journalistic representations of reality in common. Their message is that mainstream medi conceal or distort information about negative societal and cultural consequences of immigration and that mainstream journalists have teamed up with the political elites and engage in wichhunts of ordinary people who are critical, while ignoring abuses by those in power. Such media outlets (especially online participatory media) need to be analysed in the light of its position as perceived corrective of traditional media. Even though they have this in common, it is important to be able to discuss them together while at the same time take their differences into account. In the paper, the aim is to develop a theoretical framework for understanding the rationality behind this kind of criticism, building on interviews with people who are active in the most important immigration critical alternative media (ICAM) in Sweden about their perception of mainstream media and their view of participation in democratic society. The findings will shed light on how people active in Swedish ICAM perceive and position themselves in relation to mainstream media - and to each other. Based on these insights, it is possible to distinguish differences between them as well as common traits and to take the question of their influence on public discourse further.