[CIMC-work] CIMC hiding policy and Pastor Michael Treis

Chris Kaihatsu ckaihatsu at myrealbox.com
Mon Apr 19 12:26:30 PDT 2004 

Garth Liebhaber wrote:
>Chris,
>
>Well articulated.  Couple of things, and this is between the 
>Working Group.


Garth, CIMC,

Thanks for the response. I'll keep this thread of conversation confined
to this list only.


>
>First, I want to acknowledge your effort to reply to Michael 
>Treis.  Speaking for myself, I chose not to respond 
>because, for starters, it's such beautiful weather out.  
>Second, and this is probably better conversed about in 
>face to face meeting, is that I did not want to get into it 
>with him.


That's all absolutely understandable. As I've stated in the past, my
preference for handling sensitive issues is via this list, as people can
take their time and address issues in a point-by-point way, as I'm doing
now.


>
>I think that this particular case leads us into intersting 
>philosophical ground.  Not his first post, though.  His first 
>post was a psuedo-objective piece that trashed Rachel 
>Corrie, and was zionist.


Both you and Dick have characterized this guy as being a right-wing
Zionist, and that is a very serious judgment call to make. It is
precisely because of this characterization that I feel that this issue
needs to be addressed extensively and carefully. Can you (or Dick)
provide some evidence to back up what you're saying about him?


>
>Michael Treis is coming from a Christian fundamentalist 
>viewpoint, which is inherently right-wing and racist.  I 
>grew up with someone who was 'corrupted' by such views.  
>It is a major problem in America, as orthodoxy is 
>anywhere.
>


>There are actually some very valid concerns in some of his 
>writing.  Like the piece on the RFID chips.  Aside from 
>mixing around facts, there are some key concepts that we 
>similarly share concern with, such dependence on a 
>centralized economy. 


This is a fine point of judgment. As a news-gathering organization, I
think it is our responsibility to make value judgments based on content,
and not on the (purported) character of the poster. If Treis has content
that we would consider 'newsworthy,' according to our editorial policy,
then we should allow it to remain on the newswire and not hide it.

(I'd rather not address the politically oriented content of your
comment.)


Chris K.



>Treis fails to realize we already 
>have that, though.  The RFID is a further attempt to use 
>technology to break down community relationships and 
>make more of a buck off us. (slavery?)  Where these 
>people also go with this stuff is where we differ, and 
>which causes me to think the CIA has great motivation to 
>fund Christian talk radio.  Treis offers no solutions, aside 
>from, as in his Corrie piece, which is that we should 
>support the Israelis.  This is so they build their temple, the 
>'prophecies' are fulfilled, the apocolypse comes and christ 
>returns and then the rapture which will take away all 'true 
>believers'.
>
>This, obviously, is a nice way to make people apolitical, 
>and to bring about a self-fulfilling prophecy that fulfills 
>corporate globalization.  "who cares about polluting 
>SUVs?- the world is ending anyway!, use it while you got 
>it!", etc.
>
>For all their ranting, they will do nothing to stop these 
>'evils'.  They instead get off on the sensationalism, like a 
>pathology.
>
>So, this is why I think that Michael Treis and the 
>fundamentalists run counter to the mission of CIMC.  It is 
>obvious that the Corrie piece should have been taken 
>down.  The pieces with more overlap, and less obvious 
>conflict of interests might do to recieve critical comment.  
>Remember, a lot of 'leftys' have been also posting '911 
>was faked' type stuff to the site as well, which hasnt' been 
>taken down.  To me some of this stuff was clearly in the 
>Conspiracy Theory camp.
>
>What separates the Conspiracy Theory Camp?  I think it is 
>when these people are merely getting off on the 
>sensational spine-tingling feeling, and don't/wouldn't 
>actually do something about it.
>
>perhaps we can take this up at the next meeting.
>
>in short, if Michael's pieces are hid, he will sooner go to a 
>more suitable site, like the FreePers.  I also think that his 
>Corrie piece instantly put him into Troll City.
>
>we should probably take this up in discussion at next 
>meeting.
>
>take care,
>Garth
>
>Chris K. wrote:
>CIMC, Michael Treis,
> 
> I feel that the Chicago Independent Media Center 
>collective has an issue of policy which is both 
>unaddressed and pressing.
> 
> 
> * Mike Treis initially sent an email to the CIMC-Work list 
>with a
> question about how his content, which he did not provide 
>a link to,
> violated CIMC editorial policy.
> 
> [CIMC-work] Re: Your IMC website article has been 
>deleted
> lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-chicago-working/
>2004-April/0030
> 67.html
> 
> 
> * After not seeing any response on the CIMC-Work list to 
>Michael Treis'
> question, I responded to him, asking if he had received 
>any response. I
> cc'ed the CIMC-Work list, but I do not see my message in 
>the archives. 
> 
> 
> * Michael Treis has noted that the CIMC has no clearly 
>spelled out
> criteria for what constitutes a "policy violation" for the 
>hiding of
> (his) articles. See:
> 
> Editorial Policy
> chicago.indymedia.org/mod/info/display/about/
>index.php#editorial
> 
> [CIMC-work] Re: Your IMC website article has been 
>deleted
> lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-chicago-working/
>2004-April/0031
> 22.html
> 
> 
> * Dick Reilly references my response to Michael Treis and 
>characterizes him as a "right wing fundamentalist, milita 
>supporter, and compulsive IMC spammer." 
> 
> He references Michael Tries' material at this link
> 
> urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_mondex_biochip.htm
> 
> but does not explicitly explain how the content 
>characterizes him as
> such, or what part of Michael Tries' posting to the CIMC 
>site violates
> CIMC editorial policy.
> 
> [CIMC-work] Article Deletion and Pastor Michael Treis
> lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-chicago-working/
>2004-April/0030
> 92.html
> 
> 
> * Based on my working history with co-CIMC-participant 
>Dick Reilly, I
> followed his lead, and told Michael Treis not to post his 
>material to
> any IMC site. I may have spoken too quickly in speaking 
>for the entire
> CIMC collective, but neither have I seen any other CIMC 
>participants
> weigh in on this specific issue. See:
> 
> Do not post to any IMC site. Re: [CIMC-work] someone's 
>deleting, not hiding
> lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-chicago-working/
>2004-April/0031
> 02.html
> 
> 
> * Dick Reilly has called for a CIMC-wide review of its 
>editorial policy,
> which I agree with. It is possible that our editorial policy 
>lacks
> specificity and may also benefit from a clearer editorial 
>process for
> hiding posts.
> 
> [CIMC-work] Hiding comments and articles -- we need a 
>review ofpolicy
> lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-chicago-working/
>2004-April/0030
> 91.html
> 
> 
> * Further posts to the CIMC-Work list are at the following 
>link, and may
> be helpful in providing a larger context for the discussion 
>I have outlined above.
> 
> April 2004 Archives by date
> lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-chicago-working/
>2004-April/date .html
> 
> 
> Chris Kaihatsu, volunteer
> Chicago Independent Media Center
> _______________________________________________
> Imc-chicago-working mailing list
> Imc-chicago-working at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-
>chicago-working
>                                                   
>
>Support Care2 Email: Stop "scientific" whaling, the whale-killing loophole
>http://www.care2.com/go/z/12803
>_______________________________________________
>Imc-chicago-working mailing list
>Imc-chicago-working at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-chicago-working
>

More information about the Imc-chicago-working mailing list