[alt-media-res] Fw: [transmission-discuss] Transmission ethics

Tue Feb 12 14:56:44 GMT 2008

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "and" <and at axxs.org>
To: "transmission network discussion list"
<transmission-discuss at lists.transmission.cc>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:10 AM
Subject: Re: [transmission-discuss] Transmission ethics


> Hi Kuros,
> sorry to take some time in getting back to you.
>
> On 06/02/2008, at 6:53 PM, politube.org wrote:
>
> > Hi, thanks for getting back... could you please elaborate on your last
> > sentence:
> >
> > "In fact I'd say the bigger problem with TX atm is that what composes
> > the network and how the network is composed is a tad muddy"
> >
> > What do you mean by this?
>
> What I mean is that TX is rather informal in many respects, which is
> both an advantage and disadvantage depending on the scenario.
> Concretely who is a participant/member/affiliate etc. and what that
> would actually mean is unclear (what constitutes the network). How
> decisions among those who constitute the network are made is also
> quite informal (how the network is constituted).
>
> So far this hasn't been too much of a problem but as things expand it
> may well be. To be clear I don't want to propose a  large bureaucracy
> to cope with these issue (I spent enough years in Indymedia to lose
> my love for trying to achieve global consensus) but I do think it
> helps to be clear on some of these questions if the network is to
> scale effectively.
>
> I could probably write a lot more but will leave it there for the
> moment.
>
> Cheers.
> And.
>
> >
> > Kuros
> >
> > and wrote:
> >> Hi Kuros,
> >> despite not being at vxmission I can understand your impulse here in
> >> terms of being uncomfortable with people whose primary motivation is
> >> making money. Online video is certainly a gold mine at the moment.
> >>
> >> That said I think at the moment the paragraph on the front page makes
> >> it fairly clear in terms of the motivations of the network...
> >>
> >> Transmission is a network of citizen journalists, video makers,
> >> artists, researchers, programmers and web producers who are
> >> developing
> >> online video distribution tools for social justice and media
> >> democracy. Our objective is to make independent online video
> >> distribution possible (using FLOSS) by building the necessary tools,
> >> standards, documentation and social networks.
> >>
> >> I'm sure it could be improved but I think it pretty much puts the
> >> social/political side of the project first and foremost. Part of the
> >> reason for requiring a recommendation to the list is to ensure that
> >> the basic ideas of the network remain roughly commonly agreed. I'm
> >> not
> >> sure we need anything much more explicit in terms of 'ethical
> >> standards'. Who signs onto those standards and how they would do
> >> it is
> >> going to be rather difficult. In fact I'd say the bigger problem with
> >> TX atm is that what composes the network and how the network is
> >> composed is a tad muddy.
> >>
> >> Hope that was helpful.
> >>
> >> Cheers.
> >> And.
> >>
> >> On 06/02/2008, at 3:07 AM, politube.org wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi everyone, reflecting back on the recent and great Amsterdam meet
> >>> (thanks everyone), I feel that it is necessary to raise an issue
> >>> that I
> >>> tried to raise  during the meet, but due to the lack of time and an
> >>> advanced agenda, it was not possible to follow through with it.
> >>>
> >>> Let me say at the outset that one of the pillars of the project
> >>> that I
> >>> maintain, politube.org, is its stance against the
> >>> commercialization of
> >>> the internet. However, during the meet, several times I became
> >>> concerned
> >>> that I spend to much time listening to a few companies canvassing
> >>> their
> >>> products. In a memorable moment, the CEO of a company (following a
> >>> question of mine) uttered: "...c'mon I am New Yorker... I am
> >>> doing this
> >>> to make a lot of money...". On the one hand, it is hilarious to be
> >>> facing a CEO of 2.0 in a squat! Imagine this! On the other hand,
> >>> it is a
> >>> bit unsettling to meet these type of people in the context of
> >>> transmission, where to a certain extent, we are all doing our bit to
> >>> escape the commercial trappings of our reality. Let's face it, if it
> >>> weren't for commercial media monopolies, there wouldn't be any media
> >>> actvisits!
> >>>
> >>> Nothing is free
> >>> ===============
> >>> At least this New Yorker is shrewed enough to understand that
> >>> activists
> >>> are willing to expend a great deal of time, intelligence and hard
> >>> work
> >>> free of charge and if he can tap into that, it will increase the
> >>> value
> >>> of his enterprise, that's why he came to the meet. He offers the
> >>> services of his site for free, but it seems to me that there is a
> >>> misconception about this notion of "free"!
> >>>
> >>> Anytime you visit a website and use it, you are actually doing
> >>> work and
> >>> providing valuable feedback to its creators. This is the case for
> >>> all
> >>> sites, including politube.org. You are essentially testing the
> >>> site when
> >>> you are using it. Normally companies pay a lot of money to have
> >>> their
> >>> site tested and evaluated. Furthermore the more users  there are,
> >>> the
> >>> more value the site has: typical web 2.0 success factors.
> >>>
> >>> Know thyself
> >>> ============
> >>> I am very happy that I came to Amsterdam and met all these really
> >>> nice
> >>> and genuine activists and I very much look forward to working
> >>> with them
> >>> for a long time. There was a lot of positive interaction and
> >>> exchange
> >>> and I think this is the real value of transmission. In this
> >>> context, I
> >>> like to propose that we at transmission tackle the issue of the
> >>> commercial reality of our work and how to deal with it best.
> >>> After all,
> >>> the issue of money is not a trivial one and we all like to have some
> >>> type of support in order to produce this good work. One of the
> >>> negative
> >>> side effects of neo-liberalism is the fact that monies that are
> >>> destined
> >>> to social programs or this type of work, are being channeled to
> >>> corporate welfare.
> >>>
> >>> I think there is a need for some type of ethical standards that
> >>> would
> >>> guide us all in our interactions within the group and with external
> >>> parties interested in our work, beyond the boiler-plate "we are
> >>> against
> >>> racism, oppression of women, homophobia etc." . I don't think
> >>> that it is
> >>> necessary to exclude individuals or organizations just because
> >>> they are
> >>> doing commercial work, nonetheless it must be clear that they are
> >>> doing
> >>> this for a particular cause, e.g. promoting a free media system.
> >>> I am
> >>> not quite there with my definition, but this is precisely why I need
> >>> your feedback.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if other members of the group are interested in giving me
> >>> feedback?
> >>>
> >>> thanks
> >>>
> >>> Kuros
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Transmission-discuss mailing list
> >>> Transmission-discuss at lists.transmission.cc
> >>> <mailto:Transmission-discuss at lists.transmission.cc>
> >>> http://lists.transmission.cc/listinfo/transmission-discuss
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >> ---
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Transmission-discuss mailing list
> >> Transmission-discuss at lists.transmission.cc
> >> http://lists.transmission.cc/listinfo/transmission-discuss
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Transmission-discuss mailing list
> > Transmission-discuss at lists.transmission.cc
> > http://lists.transmission.cc/listinfo/transmission-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Transmission-discuss mailing list
> Transmission-discuss at lists.transmission.cc
> http://lists.transmission.cc/listinfo/transmission-discuss