Indymedia Editors Should Lead by Example

national | miscellaneous | news report

Thursday April 25, 2002 13:44

by Donal

Dublin

Hypocricy & Double Standards Degrade the Quality of Indymedia

A number of recent articles about the quality of the Indymedia Newswire along with the comments they have provoked make interesting reading. But perhaps ye have all missed the point:

The Editorial Guidelines listed in this site that aim to provide criteria for removal of inappropriate articles posted by the public at present contain the following 6 points:

1. Comments, not News
2. Duplicate Posts
3. Infactual or obviously false posts
4. Libelous or slanderous posts
5. Discriminatory or abusive posts
6. Advertising or other inappropriate content

Since I do not find any editorial guidelines for the main Featured Articles section on the homepage of this site, I assume that these same guidelines (more or less) apply. Yet a superficial analysis of what I see in this section, shows that almost all 6 of the above guidelines have been broken.

A few examples:

1. News rather than Comments:
News means New, yet of the 9 articles that currently appear in the Featured Articles section, none of them are newer than 12 days old and all of them (100%) are very old. Are there any editors at all?

2. Variety (non-duplication):
Of these 9 articles 7 of them (78%) are about one protest or another from all over the (geographical) world, and include pictures of crowds with flags.

3. Infactual or obviously false posts:
Whilst the fact that a protest took place may be factually correct and unexaggerated, the implicit lies and dishonesty that they contain abound. I am referring to the general messages being broadcast via your medium, amongst others of course, that are full of blatant untruths. This would be less offensive if an honest balance was achieved by also featuring protests by people holding opposite views.

4. Libelous or slanderous posts and
5. Discriminatory or abusive posts and
6. Advertising or other inappropriate content:
Of the 9 articles featured, 3 of them (33%) are about Pro-Palestinian, or Anti-Israeli protests. My first hand experience of these events is that they promote dangerously libelous, slanderous, discriminatory, abusive and racists messages. By broadcasting these in the way that you do, in the language that you do, with the contextual inaccuracies that you do, you define yourselves as accomplices to their crimes. Furthermore, you become advertisers of the worst elements of the corruption end of the 'corporate and capatalist' spectrum that you enjoy knocking so much. Namely the cosy, and stench polluted version of the oil and terror corporate industries being schemed and plotted by the kings, sheiks, dictators and champions of terror.

It's called leadership. If leaders (e.g. editors) behave according to behaviour x (inferior journalism), then followers (contributors of articles and comments) are unlikely to behave according to behaviour y (quality journalism).

Dissenters, on the other hand, will behave differently, and perhaps a little too differently, hence the current scenario: Too many articles from opposite extremes of the pendulum, leading to excesses of emotion and superficial libels, and difficiency in in-depth research, analysis, objectivity and honesty.

In short, my message is to the Editors of Indymedia: The solution to your problem is easy: More journalistic leadership. Less hypocricy.

save preference

Comments (12 of 12)

You really don't get it, do you

by C.

Thu Apr 25, 2002 13:57

The amount of work spent writing this could have produced a feature.

Don't hate the media, Be the media.
Don't Hate Indymedia, Be Indymedia.

You are the editor => you are chasing your own tail.
The only difference between the newswire and the features is that the features undergo the moderation of a publicly accessible list before appearing on the site: they aren't the work of some appointed, secret group of editors.

I am getting sick of this - do some work, join the list (maybe mailing lists are too much involvement for all the people who want to complain from the sidelines but they are the way the thing runs) or otherwise stfu.

Hypocricy & Double Standards? Take me to your LEADER

by superflygirl

Thu Apr 25, 2002 14:03

"Hypocricy & Double Standards"?
"If leaders (e.g. editors)"? maybe you have missed the point...
THIS IS FREEDOM OF SPEECH
you are not supposed to agree with everyone, you can always leave a comment if you think you know better.
There is work to be done, but I think Indymedia is doing a great job.
If you want to help out why dont you join the editorial groupe, then you to can be a leader!

being the media

by Eoin Maher

Thu Apr 25, 2002 16:00

I agree with c that you shouldnt criticise indymedia you should be indymedia. The content is decided by everyone who contributes. Post some news of you own, then feel free to criticise others.

I do however agree that the news should be more up to date, and that the newswire should have more space than the rest of the news which is there for weeks now.

To Eoin: what have you written for the features?

by A

Thu Apr 25, 2002 16:12

In case you didn't hear it...

Don't hate the media, Be the media
Don't Hate Indymedia, Be Indymedia

Which part of this do you not understand?

Donal's REAL editorial guidelines

by Phuq Hedd

Thu Apr 25, 2002 17:16

Reading from Donal's original post, here are the new editorial guidelines which YOU MUST implement forthwith! (otherwise Donal will go away):

1. Indymedia should shut down if news items are older than 9 days
2. No articles with pictures of flags
3. Any opinion presented must share space with a counter opinion (e.g. anti-racist articles must be "balanced" with pro-racist, anti-Nazi articles must be accompanied by extracts from Mein Kampf)
4., 5., 6. Absolutely NO articles that criticise Israel or America for carrying out International State Terror

Finally there must be leadership. I thought that this point had been made clear by Il Duce and Der Fuhrer. We need leadership!

Come on board!

by Paul Kinsella - Various

Thu Apr 25, 2002 17:33

paulkinsella53 at yahoo dot com

53 Lorcan Grove, Santry, Dublin 9, Eire

087 - 9748511

Donal, if you want to criticise Indymedia fair enough but join the IMC Editorial List. That way you can influence decisions and make your voice be heard. Nuff said!

No please don't

Thu Apr 25, 2002 18:49

Do we really want people like Donal deciding editorial policy? I don't! Why doesn't he just get a job with Tony O'Reilly?

No restrictions

by Daithi

Thu Apr 25, 2002 19:10

He's just as entitled as I am to be on the editorial list and contributing ideas and views.

That said, however, I don't agree with all of Donal's points - and I feel that his definition of "duplicate" is not in accordance with the common acceptance of it generally and within Indymedia. The power to hide "duplicate" posts is to prevent the same article being posted more than once, in error or on purpose - not to provide cover for pick-and-choose editorial pencil-wielding.

On the question of up-to-date features, yes, the front page is out of date. But the vast majority of participants in Indymedia have *real lives* and do their best to keep the site and newswire running. I've had two "features in progress" on my computer for a while that I can't get around to finishing off. When I start to work full time for Indymedia (any time soon :-) ) then I'll churn out a feature a day. Until then, we're all volunteers and doing what we can when we can.

On the issue of the Palestinian protest - YES. There is a huge question that needs answering by so-called "peace" activists who hoist placards proclaiming "victory to the intifada" - and a wider issue of what the leaders of the Arab world are like. But please don't fall into the trap of thinking that Indymedia has an editorial line. Indymedia's opinions are those of the individuals involved. We're hardly a monolithic mass. Become part of the collective and argue it out. YOu might find that some more people than you think will be prepared to listen to you.

TESTING

by Testing HTML-ness

Thu Apr 25, 2002 20:06

bold

Heading?

Test over

I agree

by dyer

Thu Apr 25, 2002 20:54

I agree with Donal.

I have found that there is too much unfounded opinion and blind following of someone elses beliefs in the site.

I thought Indymedia was a news site too. I didnt find it on a search engine but in an article on alternative news sites.

I dont think People should be chastised for expressing their point of view.

so, Is it news, in which case Donal is correct in his comments.

Or is it a medium for free speech, which is pretty much the whole internet so indymedia becomes pointless and obsolete.

Either way. One or two of the repliants have stepped out of line here.

Cos it's better!

by Always look on the bright side of life!!!

Thu Apr 25, 2002 21:35

Isn't it great we can all be involved in this wonderful freedom of expression (even if the CIA and others have us all tracked), try saying to Rupert "hey man, tell us the truth", anyway when it matters to get the real truth Indymedia will be there anyone remember that war in 2002 in am ....Palestine? yeah Indymedia works and appreciate it............While we've got it!
Oh sorry, forgot, always look on the bright side!

A self-contradiction

by Daltun

Thu Apr 25, 2002 22:14

"To create radical, accurate and passionate telling of the truth."
And yet the posts have to be "news" rather than "comment".
News and truth are not the same. To radically, accurately and passionately tell the truth requires comment,-on economic, political and economic reality.
Therefore Indymedia editorials are self-contradictory and incoherent,-just like many of the posts and comments.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

Lockdown Skeptics

Indymedia Editors Should Lead by Example

Comments (12 of 12)