[Imc-communication] [Imc-research] [Fwd: [www-features] Time magazine]

[boud]

me again...

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, boud wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Anna wrote:
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [www-features] Time magazine
>> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 09:51:24 +0700
>> From: Sasha Costanza-Chock <schock at riseup.net>
>> Reply-To: schock at riseup.net
>> To: imc-video at lists.indymedia.org, www-features at lists.indymedia.org
>>
>> Well. No mention of access inequality. But perhaps, when 'user generated
>> content' reaches the cover of Time magazine it means that the open
>> publishing aspect of Indymedia 'is dead.'
>
> i don't understand why this makes open publishing in indymedia "dead".
>
> What it means is that one of the basic ideas of indymedia has become
> so popular among the minority (17% or so) of us who have internet
> access, that it has become acknowledged by the US mainstream media.

IMHO another way to say it is:

"This is spectacular proof of indymedia's success!" :)

Time Magazine may be denying us credit for open publishing and is
supporting the cooptation of the idea (e.g. adding the assumption that
open publishing must necessarily be controlled at its core by
hierarchy and by the stock market in order to be successful), but that
doesn't change the fact that it's a big achievement. IMHO it's
something like NYT talking about "world opinion" as "the new
superpower" after the Feb 2003 demos.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you,
then you win." (Gandhi)


solidarity
boud