[Boston-editorial] Hiding Non-Activist articles vs. promoting diversity

[Pete Stidman]

(This is a debate that originated on the editorial
listserv, I feel it is of importance to the entire
group so I have continued it on discuss to get input
from more members, the argument began when I unhid an
article on wireless apps that expand the wireless
network that Matt had hid as "not-news related")

[Matt- I know you said you would rather do this face
to face but I think we should each just state position
on this on discuss so that people are prepared for
this when the meeting comes.  I hope in the meantime
that you can refrain from hiding articles based on the
"are they political" criteria.]

We have no agreement anywhere in our editorial policy
that says that we hide anything but hate articles,
non-news-related ones, and misinformation.  Any
conception that our site is activist only is a mental
model based on a norm and not a conscious collective
decision.  

If you want to write something into the editorial
policy that limits us to political and activist
article we can discuss THAT. Until then I think we
should not hide articles that fall in this category (I
have done a lot of work to encourage them) 

I strongly feel that that would be limiting our growth
as a website addressed only to the activist set.  I
have always taken "be the media" as a goal and I hope
we can eventually count the people of greater Boston
as our core audience, all of them.  I don't feel as
though I am out in left field on this.  I have talked
to several other collective members on this and most
seem to agree (although I have not talked to everyone,
and I doubt you are alone in your argument either)   

  I have laid a ton of groundwork for the expansion of
what we consider good content over the past few months
based on discussions with many other collective
members and the fact that nothing in our editorial
policy prohibits this. Just today I was talking to
women journalists, chemists and geneticists at MIT who
are interested in posting articles about their fields
when they have relevance to the rest of boston and the
world.  If for instance you decided to hide one of
these I would necessarily go ballistic, because having
science writers has always been a personal dream of
mine and I have spent time trying to make that happen.
 Chemistry and genetics both have political relevance
and these are progressive people who happen to work in
those fields. 

This issue goes right to the core of why I am here at
Indymedia.  Hiding articles using some yardstick of
political relevance is highly subjective and creates a
climate ripe for overly biased editorial control.  

I feel like I am here to facilitate a dialogue for
change regardless of the topic's direct attachment to
some individually perceived political arena. 

The majority of people are not into activism. Social
change is not possible unless we can reach those
people with the activist message that comes over our
newswire.  

Many many many articles can be politically empowering
without addressing activism and politics.  Any article
from a person who traditionally has no access to the
media is politically empowering, look at the magazine
"teen voices" for a good example.  Evewn an article
about hip hop is empwering.  

The article you hid is however directly relevant.  The
expansion of the wireless internet has huge
implication for social and economic justice via free
access to the internet. HUGE.  

Your statement about Gene Koprowski "no longer posting
under his name" seems to imply that you think of him
as a troll type.  I have always thought of him as a
valuable contributor and I hope he is not feeling
alienated by your action.

I don't mean to be harsh and or attacking here but I
think the results of your action, especially if you
intend to continue with more of the same kind, is very
serious and counter to all the work that I have spent
many hundreds of hours doing.   I'm trying to get a
more diverse group of people posting, that also means
a diversity of subject matter.  

A counter argument that we need less diversity
(Activists only) is very disturbing to me.

Portland indymedia is another example of a site that
is taking a wider variety of articles, and is very
successful with it.  They once promoted an event on
how to make pickles in the center column.  Making
pickles is an anti-capitalist act.  

In conclusion:
I am not talking about centering newt gingrich's blog
here.  I have little clue how and why you are opposed
to posting articles that address people's lives
outside of political activism. So far you have only
said "because we are a social and political website".
So how do you envision indymedia creating significant
and real social change in New England using your
limitation?  How do you plan to reach all the people
of Boston while limiting our site to only a narrow
part of our lives (for those of us that are
activists)? 

-Pete

--- Matthew Williams <mw21 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Well, I'm open to expanding what we consider news,
> but we've never come 
> to an agreement to do that. We haven't even talked
> much about it. I've 
> also really only heard you talk about the idea,
> Pete. If we're going to 
> expand what we include, I'd really prefer to have
> some additional 
> section in the newswire on the front page (Other?)
> to separate it out 
> from the more political/activist-oriented news and
> commentary. People 
> come to us for information on politics and activism
> and I think that 
> should remain our focus. But this is a bigger
> discussion about vision I 
> really don't want to have on-line--frankly, I'm sick
> of talking about 
> things like this on-line and would prefer to keep
> the discussion on 
> these matters face-to-face if possible. The
> conversations are much more 
> productive and civil that way.
> 
> At the very least, the Wireless apps article should
> be moved to Other 
> Press section, since it's linked to a mainstream
> news source. This 
> stuff is constantly getting posted to the newswire
> by Gene Koprowski 
> (sp?), though he's stopped using his name of
> late--basically, it looks 
> like he writes on technology for UPI and anything he
> writes, he posts 
> one of those little blurbs and a link to our
> newswire, regardless of 
> whether it's likely to be of interest to our readers
> or not. I mean, 
> he's posted stuff on ambulances. I look at his stuff
> on a case by case 
> basis and either move it to the Other Press or hide
> it, depending on 
> whether it seems to fit the focus of our site. This
> just didn't seem to 
> fit. We're not a technology site, we're a politics
> and activism site. 
> May be you saw something here I didn't. Frankly, I
> think it's obnoxious 
> how Koprowski posts all his stuff to our site
> without considering its 
> relevance to our readership. It's a form of
> spamming, not that much 
> different that Albert's stuff. But if you think this
> post has some 
> meaning or relevance to our readers, you can leave
> it up.
> 
> -- Matt
> 
> On Mar 19, 2005, at 2:44 PM, Pete Stidman wrote:
> 
> > Hey Matt,
> >
> >   I unhid the Wireless apps article in the
> elsewhere
> > newswire you hid as not-news related because it
> does
> > in fact link to a news story at the washington
> times.
> > Not sure of your reasoning here.  It could be
> moved to
> > other press but should not be just hidden.
> >
> >    I have consistently been harping about
> expanding
> > our coverage to other topics and there seems to be
> a
> > good amount of support for this in the group.  But
> > even if we weren't headed in that direction
> wireless
> > internet has significant relevance to social and
> > economic justice.
> >
> >    If we need to have a discussion of this topic
> > please let me know because I have been pushing
> people
> > to try new topics for stories in all of the
> outreach I
> > have been doing, and it would kill a significant
> > amount of work I am doing if even one of them is
> > turned off because of trigger happy hiding. 
> (because
> > I have to talk to like thirty to get one to post!)
> >
> > -Pete
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 		
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage
> less.
> > http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
> > _______________________________________________
> > Boston-editorial mailing list
> > Boston-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
> >
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-editorial
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Boston-editorial mailing list
> Boston-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-editorial
> 


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/