[CIMC-work] Letter draft re: US-IMC

[Chris Kaihatsu]

Mitchell, CIMC,

Sounds absolutely fine -- I agree with it in both form and content. Small
thing: Should "global south" be capitalized?


Chris




----- Original Message -----
From: "Mitchell Szczepanczyk" <msszczep at midway.uchicago.edu>
To: <imc-chicago-working at lists.indymedia.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 4:59 PM
Subject: [CIMC-work] Letter draft re: US-IMC


> Draft is below.  Feel free to comment/amend/revise/whatever.
>
> Thanks.
> ----------
> _ Z  Mitchell Szczepanczyk
>   /  http://home.uchicago.edu/~msszczep http://www.chicagomediaaction.org
>      http://www.geocities.com/szczepanczyk http://chicago.indymedia.org
>
> Chicago Indymedia would like to express some reservations about the
> proposed US-IMC project.  These can be summarized in the following points.
>
> Point one: Improving diverse representation.  Ostensibly, one motivation
> of US-IMC was and is to reduce American emphasis and increase global
> south participation in such things as the global center panel and the
> syndicated feed of center panels on the right-hand column of
> Indymedia Global.  If so, was the global south consulted as
> to what in their opinion would be on the matter?  Were they asked if this
> was a good or effective idea, or consulted as to what should be done
> to increase global south activity in Indymedia?
>
> Point two: Accountability.  Who decides what would be center paneled on
> US-IMC?  What criteria would be used?  More to the point, was the
> decision to work on creating a US-IMC was not brought before every IMC in
> the United States and agreed upon by all US-IMCs?  After all, the
syndicated
> features on the right-hand column of global IMC; why can't a similar
> deliberation/consensus take place for US-IMC?
>
> Point three: Redundancy.  Based on the traffic to date, US-IMC sounds like
> it would replicate the global site, but include only US
> contributions.  What new content or contributions, if any, would the
> US-IMC bring to the network?  If there aren't any, how then is US-IMC
> this an improvement to the network?
>
> Point Four: Global impacts.  The issue of US-IMC isn't just a matter for
> the United States.  A significant portion of the global movement is
> in the United States and any effort involving the US could have massive
> reverber ations, positive and , across the global indymedia
> movement.  Perhaps the debate of a US-IMC should be brought before the
> entire indymedia network--simply because of the possible global
> reverberations.
>
> We understand that it may be too late to halt the process of assembling
> US-IMC, but it would appear that a number of considerations that were
> not brought or considered to the attention of the US-IMC organizers.  We
> therefore ask that these issues be satisfactorily addressed,
> or the US-IMC organizing process be delayed until such time as these
> issues can be addressed.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imc-chicago-working mailing list
> Imc-chicago-working at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-chicago-working
>