Over the last couple of weeks a battle has been raging and opening fissures that threaten to drive apart the United Kollectives of Indymedia on this island. Unless you subscribe to the Sheffield IMC mailing list you are likely to be unaware about the arguments over claims of lack of communication, transparency and the existence of hidden hierarchies within the network.
You'd be well advised to don a flame retardant suit if you subscribe to the email list of your local collective. A heated battle is raging, stoking the flames of discontent within the hallowed virtual halls of Indymedia.
At the core of the issue is the great satan, money. The conflict stems from debts incurred by IMC UK during coverage of the G8 summit in Scotland this July. With three seperate Indymedia centres, broadband provision, satellite truck, photodesk, video suite and radio studio, the total cost ammounted to somewhere in the region of 5,000 pounds.
Good value some say but others have claimed that they weren't consulted and question why their local collective should have to pick up the tab. The ensuing flame-fest has raised serious questions about communication and accountability within the network. As the accusations fly the question is whether the network will come out stronger as a result of the painful soul searching or will it be permanently wounded and hasten the call for increased or total autonomy occasionally heard from some of the regions.
The global network is not immune to these battles and bares the scares for all to see. Brisbane Indymedia was killed out of the network in late last year over apparent failure to uphold the principles of unity of the Indymedia Network.
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/BrisbaneCrisisResolution
Disagreements are natural with such a large and diverse movement. Back in 2002 the global Indymedia network was awarded a $50,000 grant from the Ford Foundation in response to a proposal submitted by a few volunteers. What could have been a boon to the expanding network ended up spawning an international conflict. With no agreed process for reaching consensus on whether to accept the money or how to distribute it. The bitter arguments became too much for the network to bear and the grant was returned. A volunteer at the Urbana-Champagne IMC, said that the debate threatened to, "create fissures in the network that would take years to fix."
Without a doubt, the most infamous and embarrassing Indymedia squabble was the one that led to San Fransicio collective splitting up and forming two competing websites. The conflict provided much ammusment for the right wing trolls. http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9565
Is the UK network now going through a similar incident, only time will tell. Thr arguments over the G8 debt represents just one of many disagreements driving a wedge into the fragile network. Other disagreements include the thorny question of how to deal with the unsustainable workload of keeping the newswire free from inappropriate content and what to do about the trolling of the comments section. With no network wide consensus some of the regional IMCs are talking about implementing their own solutions which some say are the start of a slippery slope towards a fractured network.
At the core of the issue is the great satan, money. The conflict stems from debts incurred by IMC UK during coverage of the G8 summit in Scotland this July. With three seperate Indymedia centres, broadband provision, satellite truck, photodesk, video suite and radio studio, the total cost ammounted to somewhere in the region of 5,000 pounds.
Good value some say but others have claimed that they weren't consulted and question why their local collective should have to pick up the tab. The ensuing flame-fest has raised serious questions about communication and accountability within the network. As the accusations fly the question is whether the network will come out stronger as a result of the painful soul searching or will it be permanently wounded and hasten the call for increased or total autonomy occasionally heard from some of the regions.
The global network is not immune to these battles and bares the scares for all to see. Brisbane Indymedia was killed out of the network in late last year over apparent failure to uphold the principles of unity of the Indymedia Network.
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/BrisbaneCrisisResolution Disagreements are natural with such a large and diverse movement. Back in 2002 the global Indymedia network was awarded a $50,000 grant from the Ford Foundation in response to a proposal submitted by a few volunteers. What could have been a boon to the expanding network ended up spawning an international conflict. With no agreed process for reaching consensus on whether to accept the money or how to distribute it. The bitter arguments became too much for the network to bear and the grant was returned. A volunteer at the Urbana-Champagne IMC, said that the debate threatened to, "create fissures in the network that would take years to fix."
Without a doubt, the most infamous and embarrassing Indymedia squabble was the one that led to San Fransicio collective splitting up and forming two competing websites. The conflict provided much ammusment for the right wing trolls.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9565 Is the UK network now going through a similar incident, only time will tell. Thr arguments over the G8 debt represents just one of many disagreements driving a wedge into the fragile network. Other disagreements include the thorny question of how to deal with the unsustainable workload of keeping the newswire free from inappropriate content and what to do about the trolling of the comments section. With no network wide consensus some of the regional IMCs are talking about implementing their own solutions which some say are the start of a slippery slope towards a fractured network.
Comments
Hide the following 22 comments
Could see this coming a mile off
08.10.2005 15:38
Someone has posted the excellent article by George Monbiot tha illustrates how few organisations are left to stand up to BLAIRS GOONS.
Blair fully understands how important these discussion forums are and has ordered psy-ops to breack up Indymedia FROM THE INSIDE. Can there be anyone left who does not now understand how far Blair will sink to execute his sick and evil plans. Blair called for murdering people in London for his political gain, why are you all so surprised when Indymedia is ATTACKED.
TONY BLAIR WANTS TO CONTROL ALL 'PUBLIC FORUMS' AND IS WORKING ON SHUTTING INDYMEDIA DOWN BY PUTTING PEOPLE INSIDE TO PROVOKE FIGHTS
Our history is littered with similar examples. Remember, history has the advantage of looking back, so its view is clear. I have seen this happen OVER, and OVER, and OVER. The potential for stifling debate is immense. With the BUSH BLAIR psy-ops program pushing us rapidly towards the MOTHER OF ALL WARS starting with a nuclear attack on Iran led by Israel, we need all the alternative communication forums we can find. INDYMEDIA MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO FALL ABOUT NOW.
twilight
Whats wrong with autonomy?
08.10.2005 16:02
Further more, as far as I can see, the spliting up of SF IMC was about unresolved personal and not political differences while the discussion being had within the UK is purely about improving processes and not the civil war described above.
an individual
perhaps
08.10.2005 16:08
Krop
A hoax
08.10.2005 16:30
There is nothing wrong with Indymedia that a little open discussion can not sort out.
Twilight is once again jumping to unfounded assumption. The internal friction in Indymedia is entirely natural and total under control. As the poster above says, it will probably lead to improvements in the way the network works together, not a break up.
Twilight is right about one thing and thats that people should put their petty differences into perspective as the network is more important that than ever right now.
Steve
One of Indymedia's biggest problems atm ......
08.10.2005 16:47
In no way does the discussion over funding even begin to approach the enormity of the other Indymedia spats mentioned, and the original article seems to be an full scale tabloid stylee attempt to give it a level of importance that it does not have. In part the exchange appears to have developed out of a misunderstanding, and through discussion that can and will be resolved.
Conflict is a vital part of the growth process, and if dealt with creatively and effectively can lead to a stronger and more effective body.
IMHO the levels of trolling on the comments section, and the damage they do to the credibility of the project are a far more serious issue within the network, and one that needs to be tackled soon.
Woody
Keep this off the newswire
08.10.2005 16:50
x
2 Cents
09.10.2005 05:04
Do not ignore these trends when making decisions of this importance.
Proof Of Effectiveness
The voice of the bosses
09.10.2005 09:41
Surprised this article hasn't been deleted as normaly it is strictly prohibited to raise question about Indymedia.
lower ranks
Delusions of Adequacy
09.10.2005 14:26
Prove it.
Boab
Proof
09.10.2005 14:46
:rolleyes:
Indymedia posts have been a large part of Timothy Awesome-Clusterbomb's "evidence" in the smashEDO injunction - and that wouldn't be the first time that Indymedia postoings have been prosecurion "evidence" in activist trials either.
However, BOAB, as you've realised how insignificant we really are, why not fuck off to a significant site?
Take magoo, paranoid pete and the rest of your little clique with you.
Cos you lot have nothing whatsoever of interest to add .........
proofreader
Proofreader!
09.10.2005 17:20
This is a news site. Forgive those of us who understand the line between healthy cycnisism and sheer unsupported supposition. If you can't post news, then clear off.
And for the record, I'm definitely not a spook - I mean, from Bathgate, for God's sake - and neither am I multiple posting in all the names you mention....
Boab
Spook?
09.10.2005 22:08
Know why? Because the entire UK left, let alone just the anarchists or indymedia on their own, are not at this point of major concern to the government. We don't have the numbers, we don't have the experience, we're poorly organised, infested by liberal middle class kids trying to look cool and alternative before they get that nice easy charity job and completely unable to shake off our loony tag or engage with the real needs of the people we are supposed to be serving/awakening/emancipating/whatever other bullshit word you want to call it.
And this situation isn't helped by scaremongering fools trying to make the whole process of building a movement sound a bit more exciting by claiming they're constantly under surveillance. I've spoken to some of the old guard who were around when we actually WERE being bolloxed by the state, and unline them I've never been shaken down, had my home raided, had the office raided, been followed, photographed (well, once but that was pretty perfunctory), no-one's tried to get me blacklisted at work.
We're being ignored, and the faster you get your head around that the better.
Rob Ray
Notes
09.10.2005 22:28
Someone calling themselves "Steve" writes " know Pedro and he says he didn't write that article. "
Well I know Steve and he says he didn't write that comment.
8-)
While I have your attention, this is a good reminder that we will never know who the infiltrators are or aren't and this is extra reason that we must ALWAYS be true to ourselves. When someone we normally trust does something outlandish, we must speak up. Always be true to ourselves and always question people's motives for their weird behaviour. Do this without being paranoid is the way to building a healthy collective in my not so humble opinion.
London Activist
Rob Ray
09.10.2005 23:13
There were like hardly ANY cops at DSEi or Gleneagles, right?
Cos they're ignoring yes.
Oh yes indeedy.
If the overt stuff is like that, it might well be a mistake to imagine that the covert stuff aint happening
Long term writer on Freedom you say?
model
the evil blair must be stopped
10.10.2005 02:23
REX
England is oppressive, evil, tyrannical, and must be defeated
10.10.2005 02:26
emr
Re: Spooks
10.10.2005 09:45
Long term enough to know the difference between protest policing and a constant campaign of harrassment and villification of activists in their everyday lives, yes.
The difference, in case you were wondering, is in the circumstance. If a bunch of activists show up and present a nuisance to powerful people then duh, police are gonna be sent to break it up. But that's pretty much the same reaction as is had to ravers, or squatters. It has no significance or link to covert operations.
Ask the average guy in 'unseasonal' clothes or a brown skin whether Indymedia is the state's current focus. Ask the AR mob whether Indymedia has it tough. You'd be laughed out of the building. They actually are being regarded as a threat, which is why so many of them have been under lengthy criminal investigations for so long and can't fart without a secret service microphone picking it up.
Neither Indymedia nor the anarchist movement are currently viewed as a long term threat, for the reasons I've stressed earlier. That's why you aren't being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night so they can search your house, and why no-one is taking any notice of your constant deranged gabbling.
Rob Ray
idea
10.10.2005 10:21
Unai
Indymedia is Finito, Kapoot, dead!
10.10.2005 11:16
Indymedia is limping and soon falling down.
Indymedia is a resource that is used by 0.02 of the population
iF god is indymedia, then the majority of us are pagans!
Mrs annet wooverer
understand this
10.10.2005 22:37
emr
It would be nice
10.10.2005 22:54
Since the site is being so heavily abused it would also be nice if the discussion function could be by means of a threaded forum rather than a flat post-script area. Medialens.org is an excellent example (and I've heard they've had major abuse problems too). This would have the advantage of a) arranging the comments hierarchically so flame wars would take up less screen space, and b) keeping the embarassing stuff away from the static content.
OTOH, the literate-idiot troll(s) aren't doing themselves any favours at the moment, and he/they are discrediting themselves more than the IMC.
As for infiltration, I don't think it's some guys sitting in GCHQ. I think people who have been the "victims" of activism, perhaps as members of political parties, may become police assets and be co-ordinated to attack the anti capitalist movement via the net. This was always a modus operandi of special branch. Or perhaps they have organised themselves. In any case, there must be some explanation for this abuse.
To assume the left are not a threat is also to assume that the state really considers "terrorism" a threat, because they are certainly making major efforts to reduce civil liberties for the overt purpose of policing terrorism. But even people in mainstream media organisations (Adam Curtis for example) claim the terrorist threat *barely even exists*.
I certainly am not and do not particularly aspire to be Stuart Christie or whoever, but if he was active today, I'm sure he would be as paranoid as fuck about the potential for near untraceable electronic surveillance and infiltration that we face today! State repression is proportional to our success in undermining the state, so why call us paranoid fools for over-estimating our success? If we are travelling the same road then that's not very nice or very constructive.
commentator
Yawn
11.10.2005 14:00
erm, just to say the main g8 indymedia reporting set up costs were more like three and a half thousand pounds and not £5000 as the poster said!
and I think three and a half thousand quid, while being a heck of a lot of money, is also pretty good value when you consider what facilities were made available for people. a big chunk of that also secured most of the computers used at the edinburgh media centre, which were then transfered on to local indymedia collectives. scotland indymedia benefitted with some of the computers, other tech kit, and a venue which was available for them to contuinue using. other equipment that was purchased like wireless routers are available for future indymedia centres and projects. costs also included publicity flyers, some banners, telephone costs, van transport for kit, cables and wiring etc etc etc
it's even better value when you consider that other media centres, esp some in america, that have spent tens of thousands of dollars on setting up a centre for a couple of days.
if you want to support indymedia then you can volunteer your time or donate some money.
and anyway, this post is indeed stiring a storm in a tea cup. Does anyone really think there are never disagreements in such a large project with such a big use of electronic communication tools? That tries to mix such concepts of 'network' and 'local autonomy' in a project that involves daily work? Shock horror things aint perfect!
you also can't describe the current discussion that's refered to as a 'flame war' - (see
resista