What is it with Indymedia?

[laptop]

There is a hierarchy involved in Indymedia...

Nigel - normally you qualify as the most thoughtful follower of Bronstein I have ever read.

But here you're coming across like the nit-picker who tries to justify their bacon sandwich habit by pointing out that no-one can be a true vegetarian unless they check there's no gelatine in their disco biscuits.

There's a world of difference between the collective workings of indymedias and democratic centralism, and you know it.

I simply don't try to justify my bacon sandwich habit.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

AFAIK, anybody who goes to the meetings and doesn't abuse it can be an editor, where is the power differential there?

Firstly on the way in which Indymedia editors are chosen, I'm more familiar with the Irish system. Irish Indymedia (a much better site incidentally than the British variant) has a self-selected editorial team. New editors join by invitation of the existing editors. No user has a "right" to be an editor, the existing editors choose those who are to join them.

It's a system remarkably similar to that which the SWP leadership are often accused of maintaining, with the obvious exception that the SWP leadership do at least have to put themselves up for election periodically! I don't say that as a criticism. I think Irish Indymedia's system *works* and I don't have a better alternative to hand. But it can't even concievably be described as "non-hierarchical" or "non-authoritarian".

I am very sceptical of what seems to be your implication that IMC UK editors are chosen at local IMC meetings. Even taking that at face value though, not every user can attend local IMC meetings. They may live in a small town, they may suffer from disabilities which prevent attendance, they may be unable to make particular meeting times. People may have unpopular views or they may have different ideas about what should and should not be on the site or be excluded in a myriad of other ways. The examples are almost endless and all of them militate strongly against the idea that anyone can be an editor.

But the above gets away from the central point. Even if all of those problems above were magicked away, even if anybody really could be an editor, there would still be a "power differential", there would still be a hierarchy. Because at any one time person A would actually have the editorial power, person B would not but would have some idea of what's going on, maybe through being on the various lists and person C would just be using the site without any input into behind the scenes issues. Three different power levels actually exist. A hierarchy actually exists!

 

[In Bloom]

I am very sceptical of what seems to be your implication that IMC UK editors are chosen at local IMC meetings. Even taking that at face value though, not every user can attend local IMC meetings. They may live in a small town, they may suffer from disabilities which prevent attendance, they may be unable to make particular meeting times. People may have unpopular views or they may have different ideas about what should and should not be on the site or be excluded in a myriad of other ways. The examples are almost endless and all of them militate strongly against the idea that anyone can be an editor.

Those are genuine problems and something needs to be done to sort a lot of that out, like I said it's not perfect, but it's alright, as websites go.

But the above gets away from the central point. Even if all of those problems above were magicked away, even if anybody really could be an editor, there would still be a "power differential", there would still be a hierarchy. Because at any one time person A would actually have the editorial power, person B would not but would have some idea of what's going on, maybe through being on the various lists and person C would just be using the site without any input into behind the scenes issues. Three different power levels actually exist. A hierarchy actually exists!

More needs to be done to make sure everybody can take part and to get as much information out as possible about how to find out what's going on with editorial policy, where the meetings are and such, yes. And it'd be nice if the editors were easier for users to recall.

You can always improve things

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Nigel - normally you qualify as the most thoughtful follower of Bronstein I have ever read.

You flatterer you...

But here you're coming across like the nit-picker who tries to justify their bacon sandwich habit by pointing out that no-one can be a true vegetarian unless they check there's no gelatine in their disco biscuits.

I don't think my bacon sandwich habit has to be justified in the first place. All I'm doing is pointing out the muddle-headedness of people who shudder in horror at my bacon sandwich while wearing leather shoes.

I think that concepts like non-hierarchical and non-authoritarian when discussing human organisation under capitalism are a nonsense. I think that the anarchist insistence on using those terms is confused in itself when what they are actually proposing amount to more fluid hierarchies. There may or may not be a case for those more fluid hierarchies, but the problem with the current anarchist terminology is that it contributes to an emotional but very poorly thought out rejection of things like "authority", "hierarchy" or "leadership". I'm slightly surprised to be having this discussion with gurrier as the WSM have generally struck me as having travelled part of the way down this road, criticising reflexive anti-authority or anti-hierarchy attitudes.

 

[laptop]

All I'm doing is pointing out the muddle-headedness of people who shudder in horror at my bacon sandwich while wearing leather shoes.

Told you so.

Except I still say it's the gelatine coating on a Mitzi.

Do you have a copy of The Tyranny of Tyranny handy?

 

[IPRN]

I'm a frequent visitor to the 'View all posts' section of Indymedia (UK) and what I find irritating is the inconsistency of 'hiding' decisions, which often seem quite arbitrary. When you look down the list of hidden posts, it seems obvious why some posts and comments have been hidden, but in other cases there doesn't seem to be sufficient reason for the decision. Anti-fascist posts in particular seem to be affected, and the reasons given for hiding them is sometimes ludicrous (eg they will attract fascist trolls, they advertise fascism, fascism is an irrelevance and people should concentrate on the Labour Party.) Unfortunately, I think it's the 'openness' of Indymedia that is the problem. Yes, anyone can get involved, and unfortunately some of them can be pretty clueless politically, particularly when it comes to areas (anti-fascism being a good example) that they have no experience of. This lack of experience (or cluelessness) has lead to genuine anti-fascist posts being removed, while fascist misinformation has sat there for weeks at times.

 

[treelover]

wow. does anyone know the stats for IUK?

Their problem being that their boycotts have had no effect on our rise and rise. We now have a readership of over 300,000 different IPs per month which is a big deal in Ireland.

 

[soulman]

If the trots ever have the balls or intelligence to create a new form of independent media I'll be amazed. But of course it will never happen, everyone knows that.

 

[Wilf]

If the trots ever have the balls or intelligence to create a new form of independent media I'll be amazed. But of course it will never happen, everyone knows that.

Imagines the discussion theads:

Poll: Latest 300,000 STWC March - Was it 'Brilliant' or 'Amazing!'? You decide

 

[Nigel Irritable]

wow. does anyone know the stats for IUK?

Probably higher raw figures, but much much worse in proportional terms. For fairly obvious reasons - the UK is a much bigger place, Indymedia UK however is a significantly worse site which self consciously restricts itself to an activist ghetto.

 

[Streathamite]

I saw your deer story. I knew it wouldnt last as it was far to well reported and reasoned.

you hanen't got an agenda here, at all, have you?

 

[gurrier]

The first answer is of course that in fact not anybody can be an editor. But even glossing over that, even giving you the benefit of every conceivable factual doubt, at any one time some people are the editors and some people are not editors. One person has the additional powers and the other person does not - hence a hierarchy factually exists. This is pretty straightforward stuff surely?

Not at all - you are reducing all concepts of hierarchy into one and thus defining non-hierarchical in such a way that it is impossible (cf laptop's gelatined pills). Different powers exist between members of the collective and non-members of the collective but it's just silly to call such a thing a hierarchy. All members are equal, have an equal say, can block decisions (although imc.ie doesn't have an absolute block the process for overcoming a block is so tortuous that it is a de facto block). Anybody can join if they can convince the membership that they will play a constructive role[*]. It is, in effect, a practical experiment in the limits of non-hierarchical organising over the internet.

You have completely missed the point I was making here, gurrier. I am most certainly not arguing that all indymedia users should be equal, those with a real interest in the project, those who are actively hostile and everyone in between. Quite the opposite. What I am saying is that all users are not in fact equal and that this is in practice a good thing. There is a hierarchy involved in Indymedia, it works and ending it certainly wouldn't be "helpful".

The point that I am making is that defining the different positions that members and non-members have in an organisation as a hierarchy is silly. The fact that all members have an equal say in decisions and anybody is free to join makes it a non-hierarchical organisation unless you define the term in such a way as to make it meaningless.

[*] Indymedia Ireland currently is at a bit of an impasse since members of the website management collective can block new members. We've got to a size and influence where it seems that there will be always at least one editor who will block any random new application so we are slowly trying to work our way through this. The solution will involve some limitation on the scope of blocks I believe as the reason that current editors are so reluctant to allow new people to join is that if they get it wrong the new editor will be able to block anything they don't like.

Indymedia UK has far less of a formal structure in terms of defining membership.

 

[IPRN]

I'm a frequent visitor to the 'View all posts' section of Indymedia (UK) and what I find irritating is the inconsistency of 'hiding' decisions, which often seem quite arbitrary. When you look down the list of hidden posts, it seems obvious why some posts and comments have been hidden, but in other cases there doesn't seem to be sufficient reason for the decision. Anti-fascist posts in particular seem to be affected, and the reasons given for hiding them is sometimes ludicrous (eg they will attract fascist trolls, they advertise fascism, fascism is an irrelevance and people should concentrate on the Labour Party.) Unfortunately, I think it's the 'openness' of Indymedia that is the problem. Yes, anyone can get involved, and unfortunately some of them can be pretty clueless politically, particularly when it comes to areas (anti-fascism being a good example) that they have no experience of. This lack of experience (or cluelessness) has lead to genuine anti-fascist posts being removed, while fascist misinformation has sat there for weeks at times.

There's currently yet another proposal on IMC-lists to ban anti-fascist posts ("I'd like to deal with the source of the problem and hide the original articles as disruptive") because they sometimes get trolled/insults are exchanged on them. Great, local fascists have learned on Leeds Indymedia that they can get an antifascist post canned by posting obscenities on it, and now some IMC idiot wants to give them a blanket victory.

 

[laptop]

now some IMC idiot wants to give them a blanket victory.

That sort of proposal happens when you don't have, er, a hierarchy - sad absence of a politically sophisticated vanguard in charge

It won't become policy, though, will it?

 

[IPRN]

That sort of proposal happens when you don't have, er, a hierarchy - sad absence of a politically sophisticated vanguard in charge

It won't become policy, though, will it?

I think it may be down to only one individual, but over the past months numerous anti-fascist posts have already been hidden on the basis of politically-inane arguments.

 

[Zaskar]

This is all about your pathetic little spat with Bristol Indymedia, isn't it?

You sad cunt

No it isnt. You may think so, but it isnt. I think the whole im thing is a very noble idea that has lost it's way recently. I reamin a supporter and a contributor.

Get a grip and cut the irrelevant abuse. I think you are an ingrate (IPRN and Bloomers) and the feeling is clearly mutual. Please dont let your enthusiasm for abuse (IPRN) spoil yet another thread.

Abuse is best directed to me personally via e mail. Now grow up weasel brain.

 

[IPRN]

Get a grip and cut the irrelevant abuse. I think you are an ingrate (IPRN and Bloomers) and the feeling is clearly mutual. Please dont let your enthusiasm for abuse (IPRN) spoil yet another thread.

Abuse is best directed to me personally via e mail. Now grow up weasel brain.

WHAT is this about?

 

[Serotonin]

WHAT is this about?

A pre-emptive strike just in case you called him a tout perhaps?

 

[In Bloom]

I think you are an ingrate (IPRN and Bloomers) and the feeling is clearly mutual.

Ingate (noun): a person who shows no gratitude

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=ingrate

What, exactly, makes you think that I have been somehow ungrateful? Why would I think that of you?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Different powers exist between members of the collective and non-members of the collective but it's just silly to call such a thing a hierarchy. All members are equal, have an equal say, can block decisions (although imc.ie doesn't have an absolute block the process for overcoming a block is so tortuous that it is a de facto block). Anybody can join if they can convince the membership that they will play a constructive role[*]. It is, in effect, a practical experiment in the limits of non-hierarchical organising over the internet.

Leaving aside for a moment the notion that there is no hierarchy within the Indymedia editorial collective, which I don't accept, I'm quite taken aback by your line of argument here. Tell me, and I mean this seriously, do the other indymedia Ireland editors really believe that it is "a pracitical experiment in the limits of non-hierarchical organising" or is this just your view?

I ask because the notion that Indymedia has any relationship with the term non-hierarchical at all seems to me to be completely self-deluding. The only way the Indymedia square peg could even conceivably be hammered into that round hole is if you take as a starting point the idea that Indymedia is not its readers or writers or photographers or the people who go out and record soundfiles or the people who contribute to it in other ways but that instead Indymedia is its editors! That seems to me, as someone who occasionally contributes to the site, to completely miss what *does* actually make Indymedia radical and different to ordinary news websites.

 

[Zaskar]

Ingate (noun): a person who shows no gratitude

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=ingrate

What, exactly, makes you think that I have been somehow ungrateful? Why would I think that of you?

The common venacular usage also includes 'wretched person'. To be literal it is also ungratefull to seek to derail intersting discussions.

This is the end of this particular off topic englsh lesson. Hope it was helpfull.

 

[IPRN]

A pre-emptive strike just in case you called him a tout perhaps?

I suspect that other Urban users are already well aware of what Zaskar is. What they may not be aware of is that he is employing one of his usual modus operandi here; insulting or abusing people (often by PM), and encouraging them to contact him either by e-mail or telephone call. He records the calls and tries to provoke people into threatening him, so he can contact the police (who I imagine are sick of hearing from him.)

I know it's a difficult call for the mods, but it continues to surprise me that Zaskar is tolerated on Urban, let alone in the 'real world'.

Since I've no wish to abet him in derailing this thread I shall be putting him on 'ignore' from now on, and advise othr Urban users to ignore any 'entrappment' PM's they get from this disturbed and self-obsessed individual.

 

[Serotonin]

I suspect that other Urban users are already well aware of what Zaskar is. What they may not be aware of is that he is employing one of his usual modus operandi here; insulting or abusing people (often by PM), and encouraging them to contact him either by e-mail or telephone call. He records the calls and tries to provoke people into threatening him, so he can contact the police (who I imagine are sick of hearing from him.)

Haha, sorry but thats pure paranoid fantasy...

 

[Zaskar]

I think you have gone completely mad ! However I am gratefull to be on your ignore list.

 

[IPRN]

Haha, sorry but thats pure paranoid fantasy...

Really? Well, if other Urban users get PM's from Zaskar like the one below, they'll be able to consider what you/Zaskar say. Their choice whether or not to reply. I had my card marked by others, people can decide what they like. This thread though is about Indymedia isn't it, not Zaskar?

call me !

It would be intersting to talk to you, all this tb mentalism is just intellectual masterbation, and you are my friend are a top wanker ! (humour)

Do call, if all lines are busy, try later, your call is imprtant to us and may be recorded for trainging purpses.

Love and snogs,

Mark.

PS are you gay ? OEEE I do like it rough.... oh sorry i think I am going to far, its the damn heat and all this attention I am surte i dontr deserve...

 

[Zaskar]

Tut tut.

 

[gurrier]

I ask because the notion that Indymedia has any relationship with the term non-hierarchical at all seems to me to be completely self-deluding. The only way the Indymedia square peg could even conceivably be hammered into that round hole is if you take as a starting point the idea that Indymedia is not its readers or writers or photographers or the people who go out and record soundfiles or the people who contribute to it in other ways but that instead Indymedia is its editors! That seems to me, as someone who occasionally contributes to the site, to completely miss what *does* actually make Indymedia radical and different to ordinary news websites.

The point being that any one of these readers and contributors can show up at a meeting or sign up to the mailing lists and have exactly as much of a say as anybody else*. Shit you can even run indymedia events in practice without asking anybody. I really don't know what imaginary concept you have about non-hierarchical organising, but it must be pretty far out if indy has nowt to do with it.

How could indy be more non-hierarchical?

*as I said above in .ie we currently have problems with 'gate-keeping'.

p.s. Zaskar FUCK OFF, you little snivelling worm!

 

[gurrier]

Somebody has been up to something on bristol imc again:

http://www.bristol.indymedia.org/newswire.php?story_id=24829

 

[munkeeunit]

well, I haven't read all these posts, not enough time in the day...

but on the issue of hierarchy, yes, it is the case that the IMC is explicity not for promoting hierarchical organisations. The question is how zealously this is followed, as it's takes a hierarchy of sorts to ensure that hierarchical organisations can't dominate the project, as they have a habit of doing on projects of any political form.

In Bristol, this hierarchy issue is tempered by a more focussed guideline against monopolising the newswire. As a result hierarchical organisations from political parties, unions and ngo's can post on the newswire, and can even by upgraded to the middle column. I personally feel that all IMCs should incorporate this degree of flexibility. It is, after all, a news network.

Individual moderators may well spend more time screening for hierarchies and squeeze out news in the process. That is a bad approach in my opinion.

...........................................
QUOTING THE BIMC GUIDELINES:
"Hierarchy: The newswire is designed to generate an open news resource, and is not a notice-board for political parties or any other hierarchically-structured organisation. One purpose of this guideline is to prevent the website becoming dominated by any particular group. Occasional postings announcing a public meeting or local campaign may be permitted."

 

[munkeeunit]

Regarding elections and hierachical organisations...

Where BIMC tends to draw the line regarding advertising hierachical organistions, is that we won't allow the newswire to be flooded with party political broadcast posts during elections, but equally, to pretend that elections don't occur, and not to allow events and reports would be very odd.

Unfortunately, due to the server being seized shortly after election 2005, and due to lax back ups during that period, BIMC lost 3 months of archives. The election was reported on and front paged.

The criticisms we did receive swung between those who seemed to think we should pretend the election wasn't happening, and those who seemed to think we were stalinists for discouraging and hiding party political broadcasts.