[CIMC-working] Re: vampires and corps - POSTED: TABD update feature

[Doug Morris]

Dick,

First: Corporate vampires is very descriptive in a metaphorical sense and 
accurate in that way.  I've argued that 3 xs now.  It may seem silly on one 
level.  On another level it is powerful.  We need to have the willing to 
take that step

Second: It's a difference of editorial vision.  And that is ok.

I detect in Ian's idea the philosopy of a computer programer with the 
radical decentralist approach of the free software tradition.  Which is 
really great.
There are a handful of imcs where there is no center column... just a 
newswire.  This would be the extreme of that view.
There are some other imcs where the center column just highlights articles 
in newswire with perhaps a few summary sentences. This sounds like what Ian 
said.  In my opinion the language of this approach can tend to can get way 
watered down -- or it can be effective.  I think the former is a real risk 
-- with a sort of technocratic monotonous style overcoming the variety and 
richness of analysis. Who really has time for succinct power speech.  I am 
for erring on the side of depth and power.  Let others struggle with 
brevity.   You need just a paragraph in the center column (something I 
don't agree wiht) then fine... post the whole summary feature to the wire 
and include only the first paragraph in the center column with link to the 
rest.
Other imcs have editorial groups that go whole hog into political analysis 
and rhetoric in the center column. I favor that.  I favor a rotation of 
groups of editors with different editorial visions to have the 
responsibility of managing the space of the center column.
There are definintely different editorial philosophies in imc.

We need to be allow those editors who want to write/synthesize events with 
power and firey language as the times call for it -- within the broad norms 
of the indypendent media movement: respect for diversity, decentralized 
politics, etc.

Third. Another issue not mentioned:  Who is doing the work?

I put 20 hours in on putting together those 3 TABD feature blocks.
There was little effort by others in putting those together -- a rewrite of 
the second by someone.

The first two were hack jobs, quickly done.
This last one was shaped a bit over the course of a day with a creative 
flourish/editing at the end.

If no one is going to help with the job, I prefer to have some editorial 
discretion in the creative work I do.

I experience lots of editorial oversight in my academic work.
I am not interested in that in my independent media work.  Simply 
not.   Bottom line on that.
I am happy to work in groups.  But not in group think processes that water 
down messages.
Global does have a process where a feature is proposed, up for 6 hours on 
working group list, then it gets posted.  It can be objected to.  I think 
that is a good free flow of info idea.   It does allow a lot of diff. ideas 
and diff. approaches to get to center column.

Best, Doug

At 01:51 AM 11/9/02 -0500, Dick wrote:
>Sorry Doug, but I agree with Ian. The art here is in writing headlines 
>that can be both short, news discriptive, accurate, and sufficently 
>provocative. The trick is not to simply to replicate pat corporate AP 
>style, but still tell the reader that the contents of the storybloc below 
>are worth checking out, because something has happened, or is happening 
>that bears further investigation.
>
>MHO, It's not so much a difference of vision, but a difference of style.
>
>-Dick Reilly