Onderwerp : [Imc-vlaanderen] IMC Belgium and proposed new IMC Vlaanderen

Auteur : Stijn Oosterlynck
E-mail : stijn_oost op yahoo.com
Datum : Do Sep 25 18:09:52 PDT 2003


Lize,

In response to your e-mail.  This again is a roman, but a pretty clear
and clarifying one I think ;-)

1) I surely am in favour of good and decent background information, but
I do not see this as the most important dimension of my engagement in
IMC.vl (though it can be a part of, dependent on the time left -> I have
more than a full-time job!?).  As you know, I am participating in other
alternative media projects in which providing background information is
the core objective and there is no problem with posting the texts
written for these other projects on indymedia.  

2) You suggest that I (and TUc) just took some of the concerns (on the
relation between pure edito-work and action reporting/news coverage) you
raised earlier in imc.be to use them against you.  This is turning the
world on its head!! Some of us have been discussing these issues for a
long time and I can only be happy if you subscribe to some of our
conclusions (I don't think I've seen your e-mail).  

THE ONLY REASON THAT I RAISED THESE ISSUES IS BECAUSE YOU ARGUED THAT 
IMC.VL WAS ESTABLISHED TO COMPETE WITH IMC.BE.  WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS
THAT THIS ARGUMENT IS A MISCONCEPTION BECAUSE WE INTENDED TO REVIVE SOME
OF THE AIMS THAT WE BELIEVE ARE SIDETRACKED IN IMC.BE.  

It is *not* our intention to compete as if we were commercial rivals (by
trying to have the hot news first and write the most extensive
backgrounds), but develop an imc-site/collective that gives priority to
stimulating people to publish their own stories, reach the groups/issues
left out by imc.be, avoids some of the problems of imc.be (electoral
propaganda, lack of independence, edito-members abusing their position
to manipulate content of site, ...), ...  .  

It seems to me that you had a wrong idea of what we were up to with
imc.vl.  I understand your disappointment (especially since you hoped we
could divide the work between us - which by the way - is not excluded,
it is just a question of priorities) but hell .. am I to blame for your
misconceptions?  I've offered you several times to clarify our aims, but
you never really answered to these offers.

I did not suggest that edito-members should not do any reporting and
coverage but only that outreach and getting other people to use the
website for posting their stories etcetera is priority and we should be
careful about not creating the image that the edito-team is responsible
for the news.  I know it's difficult to stimulate people to be their own
media producers, but that does not mean we have to give up on that.  

3)  Your real source of frustation is in my impression the fact that we
do not enter the imc.be collective and try to change things there. 
Since we share a lot of concerns, I understand that it is frustrating
for you that we did not came to support you there, but hey ... there
have been several attempts - maybe not all of them as constructive as
they should be - to change things that way.  None of them have ever
changed much.  

I (and others) are simply not willing to work in a collective where
their concerns are not taken seriously, where power politics rule and
which has been abused several times a vehicle for party political and
other propaganda (eg. RESIST).  

4)  I am fully aware that an IMC that covers Flanders creates problems
and I for myself fully endorse the proposal of imc.west-flanders and
liege to discontinue all supralocal imc's in Belgium (incl. imc.be and
imc.vl) and create a Belgian portal site.  (I admit that it took me
quite a time to see how it could improve the imc-situation in .be).  
I personally am more than willing to substitute a new local imc for
imc.vl.  

The question is whether the mainly Brussels-based collective that runs
imc.be is willing to contribute to a solution of the deadlock in the
Belgian imc-network and show that controlling imc.be is not its main
aim.  

Stijn

PS: I think I've been clear on my intentions and opinions, so I will not
engage in endless debates on this.  


--- lize <lize op indymedia.be> wrote:
> Hi, short answer to Stijn’s response,
> 
> >>> (Although most I’ve said in my answer to Tuc’s response)
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-belgium-process/2003-September/001670.html
> 
> “I regret that Lize, with whom I have been in good contact in the
> run-up to Cancun, has not made an effort to ask us why this was the
> case”
> 
> >>> “the good contact” consisted of some urls to your articles
> sent to me by mail (url I had already gathered just following up the
> imc.vl site)
> >>> As you decided to form a separate collective and I am a member of
> the imc.be, I don’t have any ambition to assist you with your
> problems. It’s already hard for me to assist new people at the
> imc.be collective
> 
> “if Lize finds the feature of bad quality” 
> >>> I said vlo and guido did
> “(hey, we're only training) then she might as well have told us so,
> so we could learn from it.”
> >>> idem : As you decided to form a separate collective and I am a
> member of the imc.be, I don’t have any ambition to assist you with
> your problems. It’s already hard for me to assist new people at the
> imc.be collective
> 
> “practice of some edito-members to post copy pastes of articles on
> other sites on the imc-site”
> >>> I do it only when it is difficult to make a direct link to the
> article on a certain site, like e.g. the postings of Marc Maes on the
> 11.11.11. site : direct urls didn’t seem to work 
> 
> “I myself am inclined to focus as much as possible on outreach and
> offering people a platform for their reports, photos, analyses, ...”
> “Unintendedly, a kind of consumer ethics is promoted in which people
> expect the collective to produce news for them instead of them using
> the site to produce their own news.”
> “full and professional coverage of actions and events.”
> ”tendencies of 'professionalisation' within the collective.”
> >>> idem see my answer to Tuc’s mail : ‘I am very aware of this,
> that's why I wrote some mails about it on imc.be-process. In fact I
> read my words in your words here.
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-belgium-process/2003-September/001658.html
> >>> what are you up to ? something that I raise as a problem at Imc.be
> both you and Tuc are using now as an argument AGAINST my mail ????
> Besides, I always thought Stijn, that you were the one very much in
> favour of good ‘professional’ coverage and background articles
> etc. A lot of times e.g. you complained about the lack of attention to
> GATS etc. 
> 
> I am starting to see that you are not the compagnons I hoped to find.
> My point at imc.be process is not that I don’t want professional
> coverage but that we don’t have enough people to do it in a
> volunteer way. I always hoped you and Tuc and some others at imc.vl
> could join me on this job. Now I see clearly it is not at all what you
> are up to with imc.vl. You want to give a platform ? Imc.be is not
> platform enough to you ? To me, platforms without good
> counterinformation written on are useless in the struggle to become an
> alternative mass (&quality!)media . Do you really think you are going
> to find a lot of people that are more crazy than us and motivated
> enough to write quality articles/coverage on difficult stuff without
> being paid for it ? Come on. Are your ambitions for an imc really only
> ‘let people write their story’? Well, mine are not. I want people
> to explain why there was a huge electricity breakdown in the US lately
> and offer them something else than 5 pages of anecdotes of how nice it
> was at ‘dark’ N.Y, as the mainstream press did. And by writing
> these kind of articles with some other crazy imc compagnons, I want to
> convince and motivate people to look for alternative info and write
> the same kind of articles. You see ? just an example… 
> 
> I am getting very, very disappointed in all the good intentions I
> thought I had read in your original enthousiasm. If imc.vl (and after
> your mail especially you, Stijn) has the intention to ‘break’ the
> move towards a massive alternative press source we are on at imc.be
> now, then don’t expect any mail from me anymore. I won’t fall in
> the trap to break my energy spending time on your ‘project’. Next
> week I want to inform people about the European constitution some
> bastards are about to vote and the protests against it in rome on 3
> and 4 october. Do whatever you want. I don’t count on you anymore.
> 
> Bye
> Lize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> imc-vlaanderen mailing list
> imc-vlaanderen op lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imc-vlaanderen
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com