[Imc-london] NGO's and not getting flamed

[Richard Martin]

Hi Dave, Maqui, and other indymedia folk,

Thanks for your feedback about how the response to news stories about 
Greenpeace on indymedia, are likely to be. I’ve held off posting anything to 
see what peoples opinions were.

I reckon that some sort of middle ground, between swamping indymedia and 
ignoring it, is optimal. Because local Greenpeace activities in London run 
to 3-4 campaigning events and 2-3 quasi action events a week I’ll only post 
up bigger or special events in London, and national actions reports as and 
when I or somebody else can write something personal.

I guess I’m still aware that little acts of public campaigning are a little 
dull, but they usually contribute to something bigger, and so if their 
leading up to something more newsworthy then I’ll make an exception and post 
them too.

As to avoiding Greenpeace politics, and what Greenpeace propaganda/promotion 
is, I guess subliminal messages are out (damn), and probably offers of free 
alcohol too.

Richard
>thanks for taking the time to write and explaining  so much
>
>i'd welcome action events and big event info
>
>the main thing about the "not a notice board" is more to protect against
>big orgs / parties sending everything they have to the wire - as you could
>imagine it could quickly become full of that kind of data.
>
>btw  i like the phrase "direct action not direct debit"
>
>i guess for indymedia the similar would be
>"passionate pieces - not press releases" :-)
>
>personal reports are of course best for indy as opposed to press releases
>
>cheers,
>dave
>imc uk / london volunteer


>Hello Richard:
>
>Thanks for your mail to this list, and I'll answer my personal opinions
>to some of the points you raise. Hopefully some other indy london folk
>will do the same.
>
>you wrote:
>
> >Over many years, through lots of wierdness, too many parties to remember,
> >lots of battles at Stonehenge and with other tribes, I have found myself
> >back in environmental activism in south London.
>
>Nice one! ... but don't forget the parties .. they always help keeping
>one focussed :-)
>
> >Last year I got stuck coordinating a local Greenpeace network, and we've 
>had
> >lots of fun, putting together Greenpeace campaigns and some autonoumous
> >stuff using borrowed materials.
> >
> >But we're crap at advertising things, and so I was considering putting a
> >load of events and reports up on Indymedia.
>
>Yup, please do so! .. specially if they are local campaigns or actions
>(not sure what you mean with 'a load of events' though). I think,
>London-Indymedia is a perfect place for news on local campaigns, actions
>and other similar stuff going on.
>
>When clicking the publish button on top of the newswire, you'll get a
>form where you can fill the fields (or sections of indymedia-uk's
>websites) that you feel your posting (news/reports) are relevant to.
>
>At the moment, with the current code set up, all postings will go to
>imc-uk front page, but at the same time, you can also click local imc's
>such as london if the action, campaign or event happens to be in south
>london (as you mention above).
>
>There are also 'topic' pages. These are specific thematic areas of the
>website ... so if you contribute with news or reports about environmental
>issues or actions, then i guess it would also be good to click at the
>Ecology topic box.
>
> > However I was wondering if I'm
> >going to get flamed off, due to most of those events being tied into a 
>big
> >NGO?
>
>Well, regardless of my personal views on big NGO's and how they normally
>operate, which I'm not going to get into that in this mil as it would be
>off topic right now, I think that you would not be 'flamed off' merely
>because your postings are 'tied into a big ngo'.
>
>This is not a 'problem' .. or a reason not to post in imcuk or london
>imc. Nor it would be a reason for imc volunteers to hide your posting
>just because it is tied up, or refers to, a big ngo or whatever elese
>organisation. For example, during the anit-war mobilistions here in the
>UK, many of the reports and news imcuk received where either refering to
>the STWC, or actually posted by members of what I personally would regard
>as authoritarian organisations.
>
>These reports or news items would not be hidden if they where talking
>about the event or the issue (the war on iraq and the anti-war activities
>in that case) ... BUT (and this is in my view a very big but!) if the
>posting was basically publicising or promoting the politics or doings of
>a specific ngo, political party or organisation, then they would be
>hidden.  Indymedia is definitelly not a place for spreading proaganda.
>
>So, I'd say no problem if the actions and campaigns you are involved in
>are under the banner of Greenpeace (as a matter of fact we've had in the
>middle column Greenpeace actions in the past). If you report on these
>great, and I can only encourage you to do so ... if your aim is to
>publicise Greenpeace and its 'politics', then i guess yup, you would be
>slightly 'flamed off' :-) and your reports would probably end up being
>hidden from the front page.
>
>
> >I used to be of the opinion that Greenpeace was a hierachical structure 
>more
> >interested in fund raising that campaigning, direct action not direct 
>debit
> >being an old motto.
>
>That's a good motto! ... I'm sure it will come handy sometime :-)
> >
> >I don't really care how the organisation is structured, so long as
> >individuals get to make stuff happen.
>
>I personally differ from this view, but again, this would be an off topic
>discussion now and it bears no relevance whatsoever with you 'being able'
>to post or not to imcuk and/or london imc.
>
> >But Indymedia professes to avoid news from hierarchically structured
> >organizations, and whereas as a local network we do pretty much we like,
> >somebody might take exception, and I can't be bothered to post stuff if 
>its
> >going to get 'hidden' by the powers that be.
>
>Well, as I said Indymedia definitelly avoids party political proaganda
>and promotion of any specific organisation and/or NGO.
>
>It also tries to avaoid news that mainstream media already addresses ..
>so in this sense, yup it could be said that Indymedia is biased towards
>the stories mainstream and corporate media choses to ignore.
>
>But as I said before I have no problem if a report or news item comes
>from someone aligned to a big ngo, and even from what I consider an
>authoritarian organisation (like, for example,  most organisations
>aligned to the Stop the War Coalition) I'm sure that many items that
>appeared on the newswires about anti-war activities were from membres of
>the SWP or GR for example ... Well, as much as I dislike these
>organisations, their obsolete politics, and its greedy leaders, I still
>would not consider hidding a posting just because it's author happens to
>still be trapped under the feet of one of these  archaic (and also in
>many ways quite primitive) organisations. Maybe after coming into contact
>with a thing such as Indymedia some of these people will eventually see
>the light and be cured :-))
>
> >and I can't be bothered to post stuff if its
> >going to get 'hidden' by the powers that be.
>
>Of course, I can totally see the point of this. And btw 'the powers that
>be" in this case,  are basically people, normal people that chooses to
>volunteer in this project ... nothing more, but more importantly, nothing
>less!
>
> >So is there a consensus as to whether local London Greenpeace events get
> >posted?
>
>I don't think there is right now, nor I think it will be discussed as
>much as to reach consensus on this. Basically because a concesus
>decission making process is quite often a long and arduous road, which
>takes quite a lot of time and energy. So I guess the best thing is for
>you to start hitting the publish button with your reports. And I said
>before, I strongly encourage you to do so ... and I'm sure most indymedia
>folk would also do.
>
> >and if so what sort? Big events (every 6 monthes or so), all events
> >(1 a week or so), Action reports (every month or so), or anything goes?
>
>Well, again, nope, not anything goes as I explained above. Nor I think it
>is an issue of how often you publish (unless you do it every 5 minutes !
>:-)
>
>As for whether big or small events ... we'll I'd say that in what is
>known as "activism' size doesn't matter. Sometimes two people manage to
>create enough fuss and/or get 'results' ... whilst, on the other hand, 2
>million demonstrating in central London didn't manage much in terms of
>stopping the attack and invasion of Iraq for example. So it is
>definitelly not an issue over size.
>
>And, yes action reports and news on campaigns are very much the type of
>issues indymedia newswire(s) are here for. Also, I personally like to see
>analysis about the issues being reported.
>
>But I, and most volunters, contributors and users of indymedia, wouldn't
>like to see announcements about one of your meetings for example, texts
>specifically promoting Greenpeace (or it's recruitng tactics) or
>propaganda of any other sort.
>
>Anyway ... I think I've gone on for far too long.
>
>Looking forward to your postings
>
>maqui
>
>imcuk volunteer in london
> >
>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo