[Imc-uk-features] [Imc-uk-process] art on the newswire

[freethepeeps at aktivix.org]

I've hidden art as non news before 

Non-news : posts which are clearly purely comment, opinion or rants unrelated to
a recent event or action etc.

Having said that its always bugged me that that guideline seems to allow rants
connected to recent events ........

best

ftp

Quoting "Mr. Demeanour" <mrdemeanour at jackpot.uk.net>:

> mini mouse wrote:
> >> Or do the newswire editors instantly become art critics,
> >> responsible for judging the meaning of an image?
> > 
> > Maybe so. We seem to be letting these Latuff cartoons appear because
> >  what we perceive them to say doesn't contravene the guidelines. If
> > there was "Bring Back Slavery" by Latuff it might get hidden. Then
> > again, if it was clearly ironic and one 'perceived it' to be
> > communicating the opposite it wouldn't.
> > 
> >> 
> >> As far as prose is concerned, the guidelines do not provide for
> >> editors to hide material just because it is badly thought-out or
> >> written. If the same standards are applied to art, does that mean
> >> that any pointless doodle can be posted, and be immune from hiding?
> >> What about (for example) an image that is apparently racist, but
> >> which the artist swears means something quite different from that?
> > 
> > "Apparently" is the tricky word here, due to interpretation. However
> > I'm pretty sure articles and comments have been hidden (I'm sorry I
> > don't have the time right now to trawl through and find examples)
> > which have clearly been troll posts - hidden as disruptive.
> 
> OK; I can go with that. So we have invented the concept of "Troll Art".
> Perhaps that includes graffiti under bridges :-)
> > 
> >> 
> >> I'm not making these observations because I'm opposed to posting
> >> art on the newswire; I'm actually in favour of it. But I think that
> >> if art is allowed, then editorial guidelines need to be extended to
> >> permit the hiding of crap at the editor's discretion.
> > 
> > I'm sure crap wasn't what you meant here, and I'm unsure about
> > 'editor'.
> 
> I certainly did mean "crap". And by "editor", I meant "one who makes
> hiding decisions under the provisions of the editorial guidelines".
> 
> > In hiding posts we're moderating the newswire and enforcing editorial
> >  guidelines agreed upon by consensus. Editing is to me a much more 
> > hierarchical act.
> 
> Whatever.
> 
> If editors/moderators are not supposed to make decisions about which art
> is and isn't crap, then the only grounds on which "art" can be hidden
> must be trolling. Is that what you intend?
> 
> It's a prefectly arguable position; after all, we allow prose posts from
> people who can barely compose a sentence, so perhaps we should allow art
> from people who have no artistic talent. But this could give a new
> meaning to "newswire clutter".
> 
> -- 
> Jack.
> 
> --
> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>