[CIMC-working] tactical media fund: possibilties & criticisms of start up problems

[Doug Morris]

Hi all,

The three notes I am sending now provide 3 different types of information=20
on current indymedia related grant concerns, mainly being:
         1. a discussion of the tactical media fund, TMF -- this note
         2. a summary of some recent general statements on grants by imc=
 locals
         3. some points about the Soros funds as very objectionable

There is a lot to say on this issue of TMF, Soros, and Indymedia.  It is=20
rather complicated.  Reading the summary of these three notes may give an=20
overview.

Summary

I am generally in support of the idea of a tactical media fund, operating=20
outside but in cooperation with the imc network and supporting indymedia=20
and various other independent media projects.

I have some criticisms about the way this has gone forward and the fund=20
raising source and agent.
Of concern are:
         1. obtaining funds from the Open Society Institute, OSI,
                 founded by capitalist George Soros
         2. submitting the grant through a local IMC, Urbana-Champaign-imc,
                 to obtain such capitalist funds
                 a draft grant seems to have been submitted to OSI on Dec.=
=20
10 by UC-imc
         3. using such funds for an indymedia strategic planning meeting=20
and other network efforts
                 about a dozen long term imc "organizers" were involved in=
=20
this TMF planning process

Doing this so soon after the Ford grant debates and strong statements by=20
seven local imcs and many imc participants and doing so in private is a=20
point of concern.

For a fundraising effort to be outside of the indymedia network and various=
=20
groups of locals (see statements on grants by locals in next note), these=20
steps might be best considered for the TMF process:

         - not to use any capitalist funds from foundations connected to=20
the military intelligence community (Soros like Ford is so -- see=20
references in a following email) to fund Indymedia projects
         - for local IMCs not to do so in solidarity with strong statements=
=20
against this by imcs
         - distinguish any Soros grant funds (in separate accounts) or=20
similar funds from other grant funds which may be given to the imc for=20
local efforts -- and providing information on (and researching) the impact=
=20
of foundation activity on funding alternative media gatekeepers.
         - for building of solidarity, trust and participation (and a=20
better project): keep the process of the seeking of funds open in general=20
and to indymedia participants during its development and implementation

Hence, for TMF project to work, the organizers of this may need to:
         - involve imc participants and allies in comment and development=20
of the proposal
         - drop UC-IMC as grant proposer and administrator
         - drop mention of *specific* Indymedia projects to capitalist=20
grant agencies
         - especially, drop Soros as source for anything related to=20
building imc network
                 and not then go after a McArthur grant or whatever 2=20
months from now
                 perhaps TMF needs two funds:  a dirty one and a relatively=
=20
clean one
                 note: there are a handful of relatively "clean" foundations

It would be helpful for imc participants and imc locals to consider these=20
issues now on imc listserves.
Statements are needed.
Further strategy and practical work on indymedia grant making and fund=20
raising are needed now so these debates result in progress.

Discussion

Regarding a new fundraising and independent media project discussed here:

PROPOSAL TO THE OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE FOR THE TACTICAL MEDIA FUND AND IN=20
SUPPORT OF SEVERAL INDYMEDIA PROJECTS
http://internal.protest.net/osi/

And the listserves here:
TMF / TMF-OSI
(available only to list members - a list space used in part by=20
Urbana-Champaign IMC members)
http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo

These points are based on some of the notes on the above TMF list.

To start, the OSI grant does read:
Proposal Introduction
http://internal.protest.net/osi/index.php?ProposalIntroduction
"The Tactical Media Fund (TMF) is a project of the Urbana-Champaign=20
Independent Media Center (U-C IMC). Its goal is to support international=20
media engaged in the struggle for justice and against corporate control. It=
=20
was started in 2002 by people familiar with the Indymedia Network with the=
=20
intention of funding projects that will enhance the Network, but it is not=
=20
an agent or representative of Indymedia. Funding TMF is not the equivalent=
=20
of funding Indymedia. Descriptions of Indymedia=82s history and success in=
=20
this proposal are meant to provide a context for the work of the TMF, and=20
are not meant as a resume of the TMF=92s or U-C IMC=92s past=
 accomplishments.=20
The Indymedia Network does not currently solicit or accept foundation=20
support, and no funds from TMF will go to Indymedia as an organization, but=
=20
rather to individual, autonomous projects."

However, these conditions are not met.

The idea of an allied fundraising effort, such as the tactical media fund,=
=20
could work well in a number of ways.  But to do so, it may well need the=20
following aspects.

Independence from IMC in:
1. grant seeking / administration  (locals not involved) of capitalist=20
connected funds
2. not mentioning of indymedia network projects in grant funding (for no=20
strings / expectations)

Include the spirit of the Indymedia revolution:
1. a statement of principles of unity for TMF like imc
2. develop the effort through a planning process involving many people (the=
=20
OSI effort which involves indymedia in a number of ways has been done on=20
private listserves)
3. develop the effort on open listserves with wide call
4. develop a board of advisors from many independent media efforts

It does not seem that the above are being pursued.  I wrote to Evan, Sheri,=
=20
and Sascha several months ago to suggest something like the TMF.  Sascha=20
specically argued against a network approach to this, saying a local effort=
=20
would be more decentralized. Not.  Coonsider the above and below.

With the above, the IMC network would be independent of problematic=20
connnections to capitalists and the grant fund would be cleaning such funds=
=20
up and channeling various funds for use in multiple independent and=20
alternative media projects, not just indymedia. There would be far fewer=20
implications and dangers attached to the money.  The TMF would in effect=20
become a progressive grant foundation or body.

Criticism of problems:

1. Starting the new TMF fundraising through UC IMC is a mistake in my=20
opinion -- since the network strategy meeting is involved.  During the Ford=
=20
grant debate, three imcs (perhaps four) out of seven have come out against=
=20
clearly with formal statements against indymedia directly receiving any=20
funding from capitalist associated grant making bodies.  The Chicago=20
version of this spoke that it would be ok for some third party to clean up=
=20
the money -- but that would need a lot of oversight.  Some of statements=20
are here (more in a following note).

2. Starting this off list with a lot of funding *work* for some netwide=20
issues is a mistake given the September uproar over grants, in part just=20
about that approach.   Or, was it announced somewhere?  To start off list=20
to start ideas floating is OK.  But, all that work on proposals after the=20
debetates in Sept?  Come on!  This hurts the project from the start and it=
=20
might hurt working relationships in indymedia.

3. It is not clear that the imc network will not figure out how to use and=
=20
secure money. To give up on working through process because it is slow --=20
as Josh's note argues -- is to do something expedient and perhaps to weaken=
=20
indymedia.    Whereas, if the TMF is approached correctly, it can be an=20
adjunct to indymedia's own efforts and help build both the network and=20
links with allies.

4. While the Ford funding for IMC debates were fresh, I suggested by email=
=20
the model of an independent fund raising vehicle to Sheri, Sascha, and Evan=
=20
also (I think) several months ago as a way to sponsor various media=20
projects in various indymedia and other independent media venues.  It is a=
=20
fairly direct idea that comes out of the last grant making debates.  If you=
=20
can't raise the money inside the network, do it outside. But, you would=20
need some careful planning to make this work well.  I'm not surprised that=
=20
either: others thought of that -- or that Sascha and UC-IMC decided to use=
=20
the idea.  Sascha argued against my ideas with me at the time, saying it=20
was better for locals to do this than have a network of people involved in=
=20
discussing and starting the extra-imc body.  I strongly disagreed.  What I=
=20
was suggesting several months ago was that something like the TMF have=20
input and participation from many IMC members from many locals. To succeed=
=20
in a way that *builds* on imc vision and practice, a TMF project probably=20
needs a carefully written set of unity principles and working criteria in=20
harmony with the indymedia principles.  That way it can have a solidarity=20
and vision that can carry it forward in a decentralized and yet cooperative=
=20
and mutually beneficial alliance with indymedia.

It seems a mistake to start up a new effort like this without widespread=20
discussion and planning of many.  This could be done now -- off or on indy=
=20
lists.

I am disappointed to see a promising idea going in a questionable=20
direction.  I hope the flaws in the project can be corrected.

The way this is proceeding now, the project might generate a number of=20
misunderstandings.

I do hope the various things happen -- but not through the above=20
problematic approaches in points 1. and 2. above that have been much=20
critisized on imc lists recently.

I suggest the project move the further planning to an open IMC listserv or=
=20
offer widespread invitations for participation and regular updates.

The strategy making meeting is a key thing being planned -- some of this=20
work can be done on lists online.  If various strategy issues are discussed=
=20
on public imc listserves, that itself would be the start of network wide=20
planning.  Please see the current call for such on imc-strategies list.

A couple of points for participation on this -- since some of us love to=20
work on this planning stuff:

There is now a call (to comm, process and strategy lists) for strategy=20
posts to the strategies list (half a dozen people have written in support=20
of strategy discussions during a debate last month on the process list=20
about some strategy ideas). Let's use this!

As for my further possible participation on this:  I'm going to be=20
maintaining a neutral stance on the process list on this, as a=20
co-facilitator there for now.  I will criticisms *and* constructive=20
brainstorming and participatory planning ideas elsewhere.

I do feel obligated to comment on this now on other imc lists since my=20
initial inquiries to a number of TMF planners and to the TMF listserv (once=
=20
open, now private) have gone mostly unanswered.

Thanks to Evan for his forthright discussion of some of these points in=20
email.  I hope I am not divulging a confidence to note that he has agreed=20
in email that perhaps UC-IMC is a confusing vehicle for this project and=20
another could have been better.

Josh has also written a note that discusses the TMF process and he makes=20
some very nice points about allied projects.  This is the first notice to=20
this list about the TMF process from the planers. Surely, other posts will=
=20
follow.  However, I do not think it addresses well the points and concern=20
in this note and the next two notes that follow.  Hopefully other posts=20
from planers will consider remedies to the TMF problems and hopefully other=
=20
imc participants will encourage this. See this note from Josh:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-finance/2002-December/001635.h=
tml

A note of concern on this: I think Josh's note and the TMF proposal are=20
unintentionally dis-empowering to the IMC network, in the way that they=20
mention that IMC is not able able to raise funds. This is not necessarily=20
the case in the long run, or even in a medium range time frame of a year or=
=20
two from now. We just are very slow to develop policy and practice as a=20
decentralized network.

Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater in terms of seeking to work=
=20
on generting funds through imc locals and finding a way to deal with funds=
=20
through the network. At the same time, TMF could work well, if=20
revised.   As it is, the current UC-IMC proposal is a danger to IMC locals=
=20
and networks autonomy from capitalist forces and influence.  The project=20
needs to be critisized and revised.

I do think more needs to be said to avoid misundestanding on the points=20
above. And more involvement is needed.

As a strong critic of the problems with the Ford grant making process and=20
as co-author of the Chicago proposal on grants, even though I seem to be=20
opposite some of the grant creators, I want to assure them of my support=20
for a balanced fielding on process and for, if it unfolds, to discuss in=20
indymedia ways for the TMF to work well as an allied project.

This is not just about money -- it is about strategy for the network -- and=
=20
various vital projects for the network.  Process is a safe place now for=20
discussions.  The reviewing of messages is being implemented.  That might=20
be a good place for discussions.

So, anyway, I support the general idea of TMF. But, there are several=20
serious problems with the way this started -- which could be fixed.

It would be a good idea for local imcs to study on and comment on this.

Comments?

These are my own opinions solely.  However, I believe I am speaking in the=
=20
spirit and concerns of the seven imc locals who wrote in opposition to the=
=20
ford grant and some of which called for an opposition to all grants from=20
capitalist groups for imc uses.  See next note on this.

Best, Doug
Doug
IMC Chicago co-liaison