IMCistas - Indymedia Needs to Fill Gap Left by Corp. Media
reposted | 13.03.2007 02:08 | Ecology
After being rebuffed by the UK IMC over reports
that I have placed on their site from many sources,
some of which are foreign corp. news sites, it
is necessary to explain something that is very
important about the public's awareness. You
IMCistas may not be totally aware of what a
jewel you have. You may be the only hope we
have of informing the people. This IMC
network, although not as well known as it should
be, is very important and VITAL to getting the
truth out.
that I have placed on their site from many sources,
some of which are foreign corp. news sites, it
is necessary to explain something that is very
important about the public's awareness. You
IMCistas may not be totally aware of what a
jewel you have. You may be the only hope we
have of informing the people. This IMC
network, although not as well known as it should
be, is very important and VITAL to getting the
truth out.
Example: Woman decides not to get married, flies
to Vegas to avoid the marriage ceremony. Corp.
news has a field day.....or month actually. It is
in the news for literally weeks. Everything they
can dig out of this rather sad story is in our face
day in and day out ad nausium. But the reports
of scientists finding global warming is happening
faster than the expert's worst case scenarios
are reported in one newspaper or site, and
that's it. It's not as important as a woman's love
life? I think that the more you know you will agree
that the climate change issue is THE most
important of this century at this point in time.
Local issue for everyone, everywhere!
No matter where you are, climate change will affect you, and as time goes
on, it will only get worse. There is nothing that can be done to stop it, as the
momentum of the atmosphere takes many years - perhaps centuries - to turn
around. Scientists are astounded by the rapidity of the changes they are
witnessing in their scientific data. And make no mistake, the oil companies
don't want the people to find out how bad it is. They are calling in their cards
to have Government Officials water down and distort the government scientist's
reports. They are also paying hacks hundreds of thousands of dollars to come
up with arguments about the science. They are also in such firm control of the
corp. media that a report about factual evidence of global warming will be kept
to one news agency only, rather than giving it the coverage of a woman who
has changed her mind about a marriage.
This science that has been emerging in the past several years is depressing.
It tells us that we have made a huge blunder in allowing the infrastructure of
energy to be dominated by fossil fuels, and that the earth and every living thing
on it is going to be very sorry that things were not changed long ago towards
less polluting sources. But the oil companies kinda like things the way they
are, and they are doing everything in their power to keep people from knowing
the truth.
Getting the truth out.
There is this genius network that was put in place a few years ago by people
who realized that their interests were not being covered by the corp. media.
It began in Seattle, Wa. during the protests of the WTO. I am a volunteer
editor of two years for one of the IMCs in the US, and I'm well aware that they
were developed for the express use of individual citizens to have a way to put
out information and reports that the corp. media will not.
Well that is exactly what we have in a much grander scale right now about the
climate issue. Corporate media doesn't think it is in your best interest to hear
all of the reports and facts that the scientists are discovering. They will allow
a scientific report to be published in a newspaper here or there but will not
pick it up and disseminate the news globally as they surely should. That means
that a person must read every newspaper in the world everyday to keep abreast
of the facts as they are coming out. Can we expect anyone to do that?
I get google alerts for "climate change" and "global warming" and I check out
several other sites of climate news sources. I spend a couple hours every day
looking for scientific reports of climate importance. It is not fun.......rather
depressing actually....and I am not paid anything from anyone. But I see this
situation a bit more clearly than most people, and it's scary. I feel there is a
need to get this information out to the people somehow......and at this time
the IMC network is my only avenue.
I am begging all IMC editors to please loosen your guidelines on covering stories
from the corp. media, although I know how horrible it feels to give them anything
after doing so little for the populace. But in your adherence to the guidelines you
are actually helping them do their job of keeping the people un-informed. Please
don't help them do their dirty deed. Realize that this is an issue that is absolutely
necessary that everyone know the truth, and that the corp. media is trying to keep
the truth away from us. Step up to the plate and do what they should be doing for
the earth and all of us. It is needed immensely, and it is actually in the same vane
as the original IMC......getting stories out that are being squelched by the corp.
media.
to Vegas to avoid the marriage ceremony. Corp.
news has a field day.....or month actually. It is
in the news for literally weeks. Everything they
can dig out of this rather sad story is in our face
day in and day out ad nausium. But the reports
of scientists finding global warming is happening
faster than the expert's worst case scenarios
are reported in one newspaper or site, and
that's it. It's not as important as a woman's love
life? I think that the more you know you will agree
that the climate change issue is THE most
important of this century at this point in time.
Local issue for everyone, everywhere!
No matter where you are, climate change will affect you, and as time goes
on, it will only get worse. There is nothing that can be done to stop it, as the
momentum of the atmosphere takes many years - perhaps centuries - to turn
around. Scientists are astounded by the rapidity of the changes they are
witnessing in their scientific data. And make no mistake, the oil companies
don't want the people to find out how bad it is. They are calling in their cards
to have Government Officials water down and distort the government scientist's
reports. They are also paying hacks hundreds of thousands of dollars to come
up with arguments about the science. They are also in such firm control of the
corp. media that a report about factual evidence of global warming will be kept
to one news agency only, rather than giving it the coverage of a woman who
has changed her mind about a marriage.
This science that has been emerging in the past several years is depressing.
It tells us that we have made a huge blunder in allowing the infrastructure of
energy to be dominated by fossil fuels, and that the earth and every living thing
on it is going to be very sorry that things were not changed long ago towards
less polluting sources. But the oil companies kinda like things the way they
are, and they are doing everything in their power to keep people from knowing
the truth.
Getting the truth out.
There is this genius network that was put in place a few years ago by people
who realized that their interests were not being covered by the corp. media.
It began in Seattle, Wa. during the protests of the WTO. I am a volunteer
editor of two years for one of the IMCs in the US, and I'm well aware that they
were developed for the express use of individual citizens to have a way to put
out information and reports that the corp. media will not.
Well that is exactly what we have in a much grander scale right now about the
climate issue. Corporate media doesn't think it is in your best interest to hear
all of the reports and facts that the scientists are discovering. They will allow
a scientific report to be published in a newspaper here or there but will not
pick it up and disseminate the news globally as they surely should. That means
that a person must read every newspaper in the world everyday to keep abreast
of the facts as they are coming out. Can we expect anyone to do that?
I get google alerts for "climate change" and "global warming" and I check out
several other sites of climate news sources. I spend a couple hours every day
looking for scientific reports of climate importance. It is not fun.......rather
depressing actually....and I am not paid anything from anyone. But I see this
situation a bit more clearly than most people, and it's scary. I feel there is a
need to get this information out to the people somehow......and at this time
the IMC network is my only avenue.
I am begging all IMC editors to please loosen your guidelines on covering stories
from the corp. media, although I know how horrible it feels to give them anything
after doing so little for the populace. But in your adherence to the guidelines you
are actually helping them do their job of keeping the people un-informed. Please
don't help them do their dirty deed. Realize that this is an issue that is absolutely
necessary that everyone know the truth, and that the corp. media is trying to keep
the truth away from us. Step up to the plate and do what they should be doing for
the earth and all of us. It is needed immensely, and it is actually in the same vane
as the original IMC......getting stories out that are being squelched by the corp.
media.
reposted
Additions
what's imc for?
13.03.2007 08:47
Indymedia has had plenty of reporting on CLimate Change. The policy to hide reposts is in my opinion important in order to not be consumed by the corp media. If you find a good article on the web, why not write something yourself or go to an indymedia article about the same topic and post a comment where you can link all the articles you found with a short description. Or even do some research and collect lots of background information and then write an overview with links to the good articles.
I strongly believe in making your own media and don't want Indymedia to be full of reposts. And maybe you're overestimating Indymedia too. If you want to get the truth "out there" you will have to use other channels as well. Indymedia doesn't have that many readers. There are plenty of duscussion fora on the web or whyn ot start a blog (be aware of privacy issues though) where you can collect and present all the information you come across.
Most people who read Indymedia are aware of Climate Change anyway. You're preaching to the gospel. (And by the way, I remember being very concerned about that stuff during my high school years, so the information has been there for a bit longer. It's just turned into somewhat of a hype last year.)
There's plenty of ways to get your information "out there", even by using Indymedia, that does get around reposting. Be creative.
I strongly believe in making your own media and don't want Indymedia to be full of reposts. And maybe you're overestimating Indymedia too. If you want to get the truth "out there" you will have to use other channels as well. Indymedia doesn't have that many readers. There are plenty of duscussion fora on the web or whyn ot start a blog (be aware of privacy issues though) where you can collect and present all the information you come across.
Most people who read Indymedia are aware of Climate Change anyway. You're preaching to the gospel. (And by the way, I remember being very concerned about that stuff during my high school years, so the information has been there for a bit longer. It's just turned into somewhat of a hype last year.)
There's plenty of ways to get your information "out there", even by using Indymedia, that does get around reposting. Be creative.
my name
You've just proved you can write,
13.03.2007 11:14
While it's easy to understand your passion for 'getting information out', turning Indymedia into a news agrigation site is not the way to go about it. Indymedia has a tiny readership, I can get more views in one day for something I post on YouTube than I can for an article posted on indymedia in a month. Additionally, Indymedia has a very non-representative readership, mosts activists, police and press.
As you known Indymedia was set up to enable people to tell their own stories, stories the mainstream ignored or distorted. It thrives on DIY reports of people taking action in their own lives to tackle issues important to them.
If people want to find out the latest news about academic reports on social housing or scientific reports on climate modles etc, Indymedia is unlikely to be the first place they'd look and for good reason. Such reports are unlikely to be grassroots reports, just reprocessed press releases which can be found elsewhere. Somebody might add analysis to such reports and post them on Indymedia in the context of ongoing campaigns but that's the best we can hope for.
Indymedia is not a news agrigator, and it doesn't need to be. Things have changed since indymedia was launched and there are many places, mainstream and otherwise where news is reposted and agrigated. Google News, for example, does an amazing job in providing access to worldwide news reports - and giving an indication on what stories are getting big coverage and which are not. On the other end of the scale there are issue specific blogs which regurgitate interesting news to their readers and often those readers regurgitate those articles on their own blogs.
Indymedia is not a place for reposts, it's as simple as that. It's in the guidelines for a reason. Allowing reposts discourages first hand reporting - why bother if somebody will post the Guardian article in a few hours.
Indymedia suffers many problems which undermine it intended use - and reposts are one of them.
As you known Indymedia was set up to enable people to tell their own stories, stories the mainstream ignored or distorted. It thrives on DIY reports of people taking action in their own lives to tackle issues important to them.
If people want to find out the latest news about academic reports on social housing or scientific reports on climate modles etc, Indymedia is unlikely to be the first place they'd look and for good reason. Such reports are unlikely to be grassroots reports, just reprocessed press releases which can be found elsewhere. Somebody might add analysis to such reports and post them on Indymedia in the context of ongoing campaigns but that's the best we can hope for.
Indymedia is not a news agrigator, and it doesn't need to be. Things have changed since indymedia was launched and there are many places, mainstream and otherwise where news is reposted and agrigated. Google News, for example, does an amazing job in providing access to worldwide news reports - and giving an indication on what stories are getting big coverage and which are not. On the other end of the scale there are issue specific blogs which regurgitate interesting news to their readers and often those readers regurgitate those articles on their own blogs.
Indymedia is not a place for reposts, it's as simple as that. It's in the guidelines for a reason. Allowing reposts discourages first hand reporting - why bother if somebody will post the Guardian article in a few hours.
Indymedia suffers many problems which undermine it intended use - and reposts are one of them.
so why don't you
"Other Press" topic and reposts
13.03.2007 12:41
I think I drafted the reposts guideline this site has:
Articles and/or comments may be hidden for the following reasons:
* Reposts : Articles that are simply pasted from corporate news sites. Please write something original, by all means link to articles elsewhere and quote from them but don't just copy them.
Since then the "Other Press" topic has been added to this site, for reposts, but it isn't really working, mostly because the publishing form and templates don't really support it or make it clear what it is for.
What has been discussed, and might get implemented sometime, is a seperate wire and publishing form for reposts, and I think that renaming the "Other Press" topic to "Reposts" would also make sense since this is clearer.
Personally I don't think I really agree with the hiding of *all* corporate reposts any more, I think it makes sense to assess each on it's political merits -- there are a very small number of good articles in the corporate media and these get swamped by all the crap. Though I agree that if something is worth reposting it must be worth writing a intro to it explaining it's importance.
Articles and/or comments may be hidden for the following reasons:
* Reposts : Articles that are simply pasted from corporate news sites. Please write something original, by all means link to articles elsewhere and quote from them but don't just copy them.
Since then the "Other Press" topic has been added to this site, for reposts, but it isn't really working, mostly because the publishing form and templates don't really support it or make it clear what it is for.
What has been discussed, and might get implemented sometime, is a seperate wire and publishing form for reposts, and I think that renaming the "Other Press" topic to "Reposts" would also make sense since this is clearer.
Personally I don't think I really agree with the hiding of *all* corporate reposts any more, I think it makes sense to assess each on it's political merits -- there are a very small number of good articles in the corporate media and these get swamped by all the crap. Though I agree that if something is worth reposting it must be worth writing a intro to it explaining it's importance.
IMC'er
