Un mensaje igual en Español ya ha sido enviado.
The Future of the OURMedia Network.
What should we do with our network?
Where are we going?
With the goal of maintaining debate and discussion about the future of our OURMedia network, and on the base of what was agreed several weeks ago (or maybe some months ago already!) we have prepared the following notes about the origin and development of OURMedia. Of course many of you will have different, complementary, or even contradictory versions, but the point is precisely to nurture the debate with all of these, so that we can collectively make better and more informed decisions. For this reason, we want to invite all of you who want to participate with your comments and ideas to do so in an active way, because only then will we have a comprehensive version of who we are and where we want to go. OURMedia is a network that belongs to all of us, there are no hierarchies, differentiated forms of membership, or seniorities in OURMedia.
Recently we have experienced events that allow us to see the vitality of the network (the most recent one being the Conference in Bangalore) and at the same time we have initiated a discussion about our future. Some members have identified and tried several times and in several different ways to have a discussion and to make decisions about: 1) establishing a governance structure different from the current one, and this issue seems to be pressing; 2) securing funding; 3) setting up an institutional structure; 4) securing a stable communications infrastructure (including the website, translation needs, designing new communication spaces such as blogs, a wiki or at least bulletin boards and the e-lists).
These issues make us re-think certain fundamental points: are we witnessing an evolutionary phase of our network? Do we need new mechanisms to operate well? More structure? Less structure? Something that seems clear is that the best way for OURMedia to thrive is that its members truly inhabit the network; for this reason, your responses to this message are significant source of oxygen for OURMedia.
Clemencia has noted that OURMedia worked well (meaning people were seriously involved, dedicated much time to the network, etc.) when the network was the only community people could count on. During those first phases of OURMedia community media, radical media, alternative media were so marginal, neither within academia nor outside were there forums where we could discuss, share, dialogue our passion and interests; there was no Indymedia; no CRIS; no WSIS; no regional forums. This is why we started OM; the main reason was to have our own community. And people responded, made incredible commitments, volunteered. But things have changed dramatically. Now, the number of citizens´ media projects and media reform initiatives (both academic and ´real life´) out there has multiplied tremendously. “I truly believe that not many people have energy or time for OM because there are so many events, projects, forums that request our participation that we cannot commit to one more. But instead of complaining about this we should be excited.”
Sergio Rodríguez says: “Under the basis of my participation in OURMedia –which has been fragmented and somehow uneven- I can identify two forces-in-tension somehow related to the characteristics of its members: one force towards the “formalization” of the network in a kind of organization serving the interest of Media/ICTs’ reform movements; another force towards either the dissolution of OURMedia or its maintenance as an unstructured network serving the interests of its members. My last words: all this happens as a result of an amazing process of creativity, initiative, personal involvement, volunteering, participation, debate, and knowledge. In this sense, OURMedia is clearly a success history. I personally believe that this has been a wonderful journey and would like to thank to all the people who have worked on this network, who created it and keep it alive, and put in circulation joy, time, hope and smiles in every message, in every meeting, in every hour volunteered. I also think that OURMedia has accomplished what it was expected and much more… and I also think OURMedia has much more to do and can do it; I am sure this discussion in a big step in that direction.”
So we need to have a discussion about OURFuture. The notes below, compiled thanks to the work of Sergio Rodriguez, Alfonso Gumucio-Dagron, and Clemencia Rodriguez should help us in this collective discussion. We think it is possible to identify some “phases” of OURMedia since its birth in Washington –summer, 2001- until the last meeting in Bangalore –December 2005.
1. Origin: Our Media Not Theirs I meeting in Washington, 2001.
About fifty people, mainly from North America, South America, Australia and Europe, met for the first time with the idea of creating a network of academic and activists to discuss and work on issues of community media, alternative media, citizens’ media or radical media, as you would like to name it. Clemencia Rodriguez, Nick Couldry and John Downing, the organizers, were instrumental to put this first meeting together as a pre-conference to the International Communication Conference, which is a meeting of mainly USA communication academics.
The original goal of this meeting–as it is explained by Clemencia Rodriguez in the Final Narrative Report to the Ford Foundation—was to “reinstate citizens’ media back to the central place they deserve on the academic and media policy agenda (…)” This goal was greatly achieved between the academics participating in the 2001 ICA meeting in Washington. Important contacts were made among those academics and also with founders. Building bridges between academics and practitioners appears to be one of the most concerning issues between the first OM Not Theirs meeting and the second one, held in Barcelona. In any case, it is important to highlight that the immediate antecedent of OURMedia was a meeting and an academic forum, and to note that for this meeting it was not necessary to carry out any kind of external fundraising because the people participating had their own way to cover their expenses, sponsored by their universities.
2. Inception and framework: Our Media Not Theirs II meeting in Barcelona, 2002 and emergence of OURMedia / NUESTROSMedios.
The original “core team” (Rodriguez, Couldry, Downing) organized the second meeting in the frame of another academic event (the Conference of the IAMCR-2002) and with the initial support of the Ford Foundation invited about five “practitioners” or communicators. The Statement of Purpose of OURMedia was produced in Barcelona, defining it as an emerging global network of scholars and practitioners “concerned” with community media. There was agreement upon some core principles related to the right to communicate, the unbalance of information flows, and the need for collaborative work between academics and practitioners in order to have a positive impact in the international policy arena.
Once more Our Media Not Theirs II was a one-day pre-conference to a larger congress, this time of the International Association of Media and Communication Research (IAMCR). Our group was about a hundred people this year. The obvious reason for doing the first two conferences along with a larger event, ICA or IAMCR, is that most of our colleagues from universities in Europe, North America and Australia, could get funding for their air tickets. Otherwise it would have been difficult to meet. Some other colleagues from developing countries benefited from travel funding that Our Media got from the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and the Ford Foundation. Our website was established with the volunteer help of John Higgins.
With the purpose of supporting, consolidating, and developing this emerging network it was decided to apply for a grant to the Media Policy and Technology Division of the Ford Foundation. Due to the fact that there was not a formal “organization” behind the network, the application was made through the University of Oklahoma, which became the grantee organization for the OURMedia Project. In that application it was stated that OURMedia intended to become “the most significant global network of citizens’ media academics and practitioners”. At the time it was foreseen a growing process targeting Latin America in 2003 and then Africa and Asia in 2004 and 2005. During this stage is important to highlight the following:
* The network was born (not longer the annual Conference “Our Media Not Theirs” but a network.)
* It order to be more inclusive the network became bilingual –at least in theory--OURMedia/NUESTROSMedios.
* A structure was adopted (not a formal one) including a Steering Committee, a Web Site, and a list serv. OM began having its own budget and an administrative hosting organization.
* A grant was devoted to the development of the network ($100,000.00 from the Ford Foundation).
* A kind of action plan was produced and executed, including targeting international public policy scenarios such as the WSIS and the World Social Forum.
* Some other organizations or networks were also identified as possible partners, including AMARC and the CRIS campaign.
* Core themes for the interaction between academics and practitioners were suggested, including citizens’ media research, community media regulation, and evaluation.
3. Growth and Consolidation: 2003 and 2004.
Thanks to the fact that there were a planning process and for the first time a budget devoted to the network (so far sadly it seems to be also “for the last time”), during the years 2003 and 2004 OURMedia had an impressive phase of growth and increased strength which took it from a relatively isolated and timid position to a undoubtedly protagonist and leading status in the international media and ICTs reform movement. OURMedia goals also evolved and included ICTs and other technology issues, and somehow other social movements as well.
Two international conferences were held during this phase, both in the Global South; Barranquilla, Colombia (2003), and Porto Alegre, Brazil (2004), both in non-English speaking countries, both in an autonomously way and not subsidiary to other event like the ICA or IAMCR Conferences, both with core funding for the Conference and for some participants (though much more less in Porto Alegre).
OURMedia III meeting was not organized along with a larger conference, but together with a national communication conference with active participation of Colombian communication scholars, activists and students. For the first time we had real local partnership: the Universidad del Norte, in Barranquilla. This meant a whole new development for OURMedia, since the organization of the conference was shared with local institutions and the participation largely increased in numbers. We had more interaction with Colombian colleagues, and we had, for the first time, the opportunity to do field trips to visit local projects and initiatives of social development. This was also the first time that an OURMedia /NUESTROSMedios conference extended over two days and included field visits. After the 2001 conference OURMedia had 225 members in 36 countries.
Encouraged by the experience, we held OURMedia IV in another country of Latin America, Brazil. Thanks to the organizing commitment of CIMA (Center for International Media Action) and Janice Windborne (Southwestern Missouri State University) we met in Porto Alegre, the city that is famous for hosting the World Social Forum where social movements of the world meet every year. OURMedia IV conference linked again with an IAMCR congress; however, we had the opportunity of counting on local support from activist groups who organized field trips, ICT laboratories, a live community radio in the campus of the university[1], and other parallel activities. For the first time our programme extended over three days, including the conference and field trips. More practitioners and activists joined OURMedia / NUESTROSMedios, which in the first two years was very much a network of academics. At the end of OM IV John Downing’s proposal to host OM at his university (Southern Illinois University) so that website and other logistic support would be secured was approved.
The fusion between the Academy and Practitioners, and, in some extend, the “reality” –if we can say it in that way- was strong and liberated an enormous amount of energy that, first, facilitated a considerable growth of the network (52%); second, consolidated OURMedia as a major player in the international public policy debate well beyond any expectations; third, created a friendly environment for practitioners, activists, and representatives of social movements, who “populated” OURMedia creating a really unique network which made possible collaborative projects and research as well as impact in the field.
This “eclosion” also generated internal changes and tensions. Maybe the more evident ones were, in one hand, the sense of losing the rigor and the grounding in the academy (some people even complained of the fact that OURMedia IV was not longer an academic event), and, on other hand, the perception of losing a historic opportunity of enhancing the Media/ICTs reform movements and the democratization of the media through OURMedia (sometimes some people whish OURMedia was a social movement rather than a network).
4. Maturity: 2005 and Middle Life Crisis.
At that point, OURMedia/NUESTROSMedios, is a truly global network, with hundreds of members in many countries with a boundless growing process…(with strong presence in Latin America and North America, less in Europe and a clear emergence in Asia –Africa remaining less represented)… but at the same time OM is a network with no funds, no fundraising strategy, no structure of Governance (though a Steering Committee was elected in Porto Alegre). Then, the decision of holding the next conference in Bangalore was made and –consequently- OURMedia members from that part of world assumed a leading role.
OURMedia V was organized by a local committee with help of an international committee in Bangalore, India. For the first time the OURMedia /NUESTROSMedios conference was held in Asia; for the first time it was organised outside of the Western part of the world. This became feasible thanks to the initial contacts of Ellie Rennie, Jo Tacchi, Dorothy Kidd among other, and made possible by the Indian committee that was later formed, and with the contributions from Juan Salazar, Sergio Rodríguez, and Clemencia Rodríguez. It was also the first time the OURMedia conference was not tied to any other event, standing on its own feet. For the first time the organization of the conference was largely in the hands of the hosting country, led by a group of local institutions, mainly Voices and the United Theological College.
The Bangalore conference released a whole new level of energy and vitality; in Bangalore there was no feeling of failure or “burn out;” on the contrary, this event was experienced as oxygen for the network. Also, OURMedia V was better at keeping the entire network informed with daily updates; also, the Indian organizing committee and Jo Tacchi prepared thorough reports about the conference. And finally, for the first time a publication including all conference papers is being prepared by the Indian organizers.
According to the last update of our lists done by Marilu Villachica, in January of 2006 OURMedia has around 450 members in 44 countries.
Nowadays, after the Bangalore meeting a discussion about the present and the future of OURMedia emerged in one of the OM e-lists. The discussion concluded with the need to bring the discussion to the general list to open participation to all OM members, and this is what we are doing here now. During the previous discussion it became clear that some members are thinking that OURMedia as a global network should to go a step forward and constitute a formal organization; some others find in OURMedia evidence of a generational change in the research and the practice and therefore expect the network to reflect on those changes; others simply consider OURMedia as good as it gets and have no more expectations; still other members believe that precisely because OURMedia has always been a very fluid and free network, its constantly changing membership will keep it from stagnation.
Steering Committee
At the end of OURMedia V (Bangalore) it was decided that a ten member steering committee should be formed. Five volunteers were already identified in Bangalore; they are Jethro Pettit, Tanya Notley, Tripta Chandola, Juan Salazar, and Alfonso Gumucio-Dagron. When the local committee is formed, at least two members of this steering committee should be in the local committee. The responsibilities of the steering committee are : 1) Fund raising; 2) Supporting website; 3) Managing the lists; 4) Linking with local organization committee once location for next conference is selected.
WE NEED FIVE MORE MEMBERS WHO BELIEVE THEY HAVE THE NECESSARY TIME AND ENERGY TO JOIN THIS COMMITTEE.
WE ALSO NEED TO HEAR PROPOSALS ABOUT THE WHERE AND WHEN OF THE NEXT CONFERENCE.
Questions and Next Steps
So, what do you think we should do? Where should we take OURMedia? Re-structure it? Re-think it? Do you see OURMedia as a network with several functions and working groups (such as funding, governance, collaborations between academics and activists, archival site for alternative media materials, etc.) or only as an annual event (or bi-annual)? What would YOU be willing to do as a member? What would YOU like to do and be a part of? What would you like OURMedia to be?
(This was prepared with input from many OM members)
_____
[1] The Our Media conference and the IMCR congress were both hosted by the Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS).
|
