Julio López
está desaparecido
hace 6402 días
versión para imprimir - envía este articulo por e-mail

Does Indy have a future?
Por Prak - Sunday, Jan. 31, 2016 at 6:45 PM

Responding to : Interesting 19.01.2016 15:27 So a small unrepresentative clique with extremist views took over the newswire and pushed out the majority. I wonder if that has ever happened before with Indymedia ? ---Ben

Are you alluding to the demise of the Seattle wire? Which most IMC are strangely quiet about considering the Seattle WTO protests were the birth of Indymedia. I'm sure most don't know or are expecting someone with more info to weigh in, but even at this late date it is relevant, if for no other reason that to answer honestly if Indymedia is still an effective activist tool.

I know the DC IMC was taken over by a guy called Luke Kuhn who had a disturbing association with racist groups.
http://takimag.com/article/bill_white_sociopath/print#axzz3yrCc7tWo
(warning:some Ron Paul apologism, but some interesting perspectives on the DC indy scene)

Some say Kuhn was misled, others say he's a fake activist or mentally challenged. Whichever it is, the DC IMC failed as a collective. It shouldn't matter if Luke was for real or not; the collective should have been able to keep an individual or small group from taking over.

Which brings up another issue: is the organization of the IMC collectives inherently flawed, attracting exploitive groups with an agenda who are willing to manipulate the organization for their own gain? Or is the model sound, but the people involved were too naive or hesitant to use the tools to prevent trouble makers from getting a foothold?

This isn't just an Indymedia problem. Many open groups, historically welcoming to "free thinking" types, are having a crisis of identity. The Sceptic community was shaken when Micheal Shermer's history of drunken predatory behaviour came to light. Harlan Ellison groped someone on stage. Many of these communities predate Indymedia but are now scrambling to set down standards of behaviour and rally the political will to enforce those standards. What is baffling is it took this long and social media to motivate them to do it. Clearly there was always a small group of entitled assholes used to exploiting those groups and now they're shocked they're being called out.

The "entitled assholes" in political communities were attracted to Indymedia because of it's open inclusive structure. Early members full of idealism saw this openness as an asset and couldn't imagine it as a liability. That failure of imagination opened the door for the extremists to come in, then act like they owned the place. And if anyone objected, they'd squawk "Freeze Peach".

It is appalling that this worked. The trouble makers should have been shut out in a "New York" minute. Not debated, not voted on...just shut out...the minute there was evidence they were pushing, endorsing extremism or extremist propaganda. 'No Pasaran' should be at the core of any progressive principles, but it obviously wasn't. Or it wasn't understood. Or people had a misguided belief that the collective management would eventually work, even long after it was clear it wasn't. Any type of idealistic organization must face the fact, no matter how well thought out your principles/methodolgy are, they can be "hacked" and exploited by unprincipled people. As history stands, the Indymedia collectives have been ineffectual in defending themselves from this kind of manipulation.

Or, almost as bad, when the problem is recognized, it's attributed to the Feds or MI6 infiltration. Not to dismiss real monitoring of activists by government agencies, in most situations where new wires are thrown into chaos, fall apart or are taken down can be traced to the banal everyday corruption, cronyism, and incompetence. In the case of extremist groups taking over a wire, they rarely have the technical and financial resources to keep it going. And since they alienated everyone else in their coupé, the wire is almost certainly doomed to oblivion.

The worst threat to Indymedia isn't the "feds" or "agents", but the Indywires collective inability to effectively manage itself. Combine that with predatory extremists looking for easy pickings, the naive volunteers who believe them at face value, and social media networks taking over the self publishing niche, the chances of Indymedia surviving another 10 years as a relevant media is slim at best.


http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2016/01/523898.html

agrega un comentario


Dear comrades
Por The answer is yes - Sunday, Jan. 31, 2016 at 8:31 PM

Yes, does independent, alternative media, connected with the grassroots struggles, with the social movements, will continue to have a future as long as capitalism exists

agrega un comentario


@The answer is yes
Por Nice idea.... - Monday, Feb. 01, 2016 at 12:47 AM

Generally I agree, but you can't ignore there are real problems is how to keep the Indymedia culture alive while staying true to it's principles.

Lots of wires have been shut down. How can we stop that from happening? Or maybe even bring some back?

agrega un comentario