[Imc-newsroom] IMC Criteria - Open Publishing

[sheri]

hi folks,

here are the minutes for the most recent IRC meeting. these particular
minutes/notes deal specifically with the topic of IMC criteria (you know --
so you wanna be an IMC document).  in this meeting, we were particularly
focussed on the specific criteria of "open publishing".

the other subgroups in that meeting were (a) communication and process about
the lists and irc, and (b) decision-making structures and processes.  people
should be posting minutes to these two breakout groups soon.

we would like to get a decision from the IMC collective about open
publishing as a criteria for being an IMC as soon as possible.  so please
share this information with your IMC and send back your response to the
IMC-communication list.

love
sheri

PS - when you reply, please let us know which IMC you are speaking on behalf
of and if you could give us the best contact information for your IMC that
would be great! and let us know if you have an active site or not.

*******************************

Minutes for 2/25 IMC Criteria IRC Meeting (this was a breakout session of
the main IRC meeting)

Consensus by all participants in this meeting:  We should have "open
publishing" as the real default for the new IMC document, and only in
specific circumstances will there be an exception.

Discussion Points:

1. democratizing the media is top priority and the goal.

2. open publishing falls under our goal as a tactic through which we are
breaking down authoritarian media structures.

3. we see the necessity of establishing criteria for "closed publishing".
Under what conditions is open publishing not the rule? And if an IMC doesn¹t
choose open publishing, are they not in alignment with the goal of
democratizing the media.  they need to explain the need to not have open
publishing in these terms, and to justify their choice.  wanting to more
effectively filter out "noise" is not a good reason (a decent editorial
policy should cover this).  We can make exceptions, but only as long as it's
within the context of new IMCs understanding and supporting the reasoning
behind open publishing.

4. Some of those exceptions - EXCEPTION CRITERIA: (a)  if it's a LEGAL
problem, if they cannot function legally with open publishing.

5. Legal solution for national laws:  issue of location of server was
brought up; many media activists in middle east countries could use the
capacity we have to get around local laws on publishing info.  Several
people are looking at freenet and haveco as allies in this project.  Some
people shared that they would rather see us moving to using off shore
servers and other technical means to avoid national laws than succumbing to
the demands for censorship from the nation state.

6. IMCs need a basic editorial policy for dealing with racist, hate speech,
commercial postings (the editorial policy should cover "noise", i.e.,
duplicate posts)

7. Comment feature is integral to Indymedia.

8. We agreed that we need to have different processes for New and Old IMCs:
We agreed we wanted to come up with the IMC criteria and also deal with
older IMCs who don¹t have open publishing.

9. Use of the logo - we have no requirements for using logos, people are
free to change the look of the site as much as they want.  Do we want this
to be part of the IMC criteria or is this left to the local autonomy?  Do we
want certain perimeters?

Specific Questions to CMAQ (currently not using open publishing as is
historically used and quebec.indymedia.org is pointing to them; we want to
talk about these issues and find the common ground.  We recognize that we
agreed to let them use the subdomain name because at the time our process
over the IMC criteria was not clear.  We¹re changing that now and needing to
deal with several "old IMCs":

 Is their perspective to democratize the media or to broaden it within
existing framework for operation.

 they do have an open process for how they make editorial decisions, but
can we participate in those decisions or be on their lists?.

 we would like to see the documentation for the articles that are
rejected..

 would they consider putting an open news wire somewhere on their site,
linked from the front page, to which anyone can post.  Then they could pick
and choose whatever they want to feature, but people would still get to see
their article up there.  Most people would probably choose to view the CMAQ
front page and see the "good" articles, but there still would be the ability
for people to be part of the open process


MISC.


 Open Publishing:  empowerment is a result of open publishing, it¹s an
essential part of the indymedia process.  Empowering people to make their
own media.  It takes the elitism out of journalism.  There needs to be
transparency in the publishing process.  If people choose not to OP, are
they then not valuing the empowerment that people feel when they get to
publish their news to the site?


 Reciprocal Relationship:  What you get when you become an IMC:  domain
name, use of the logo, server space (loudeye)


 Humor/Hidden Posts:  Compile all the hidden posts by a humorist ­ write a
column that makes fun of them.  All those people would feel included.  Do it
once a week.


 Statement of Principles:

There are strong principles that bind us together and if we can articulate
them and people can agree to those then making the exceptions and allowing
for the autonomy at the local level will work.  without those strong guiding
principles, it's easy to get pulled away from a strong vision.
1.    anti-authoritarian approach to decision-making.
2.    we're consensus based as much as possible.  We strongly encourage this
kind of direct participation.
3.    we believe in the free flow of information and that information cannot
be commodified.
4.    purpose:  we're working toward a social revolution that is
egalitarian, non-hierarchical, non-oppressive and democratic..

We are advocating democratizing the media within the context of a struggle
for radical social and political transformation of society based along
egalitarian anti-sexist, anti-racist policies, but our focus is on the media
politics and how people communicate, including all forms of communication.
Who are we?  We are a dusty crazy band of diverse media activists and lovers
of a better world.  We need to define media, and talk about the struggle
over information and communication in society, that's what I think we mean
when we talk about media, we're talking about the playing out of social
struggle through the context of information


 Indymedia is spreading a consensus type of decision making process around
the world and showing how it can work and actually get things done and being
inclusive too. Indymedia is influenced heavily by anarchism, but is not an
anarchist project, A-Infos does that better; Indymedia is broader.


 We don¹t think we should say that the IMC is an anarchist project. Those
kinds of definitions can limit our appeal to more people who maybe have an
association with anarchism through the mainstream media.  but the values
that underlie anarchism are much more in line with how we organize
ourselves.  that people can see and feel and learn by example and
experience.  We might want to focus on how we can counter the media¹s
portrayal of anarchism and other misrepresented issues more effectively.


_______________________________________________
Imc-communication mailing list
Imc-communication at lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication