Structure Proposal
- Thread starter Trinnien
- Start date
The OIM needs a rebranding, and a broader vision than it had previously. What I present above is largely the same concept as the principles the OIM was founded under, but with some wider and perhaps loftier goals in mind as well. Going through the old topics within the archived OIM forum, I saw a lot of...brainstorming isn't quite the word, but I don't like the word spitballing. Efforts to be as open-minded and collaborative as possible were, I believe, part of its downfall. Simply put: we need a vision that is definite enough to be pursued, while open enough to be contributed to by others.
If others would support me, I recommend we refound the OIM as ACME, un-archive the forum (and possibly create a few sub-forums within), and I will take over as the first Director, with a view to setting things in motion before we elect a new Director to take over afterward.
If others would support me, I recommend we refound the OIM as ACME, un-archive the forum (and possibly create a few sub-forums within), and I will take over as the first Director, with a view to setting things in motion before we elect a new Director to take over afterward.
I’m not sure that a special position is needed to administer/approve/archive private media outlets. The MoC hasn’t shown any bias in this activity, nor have there ever been any issues related to over-archiving. Indeed, the only issue is perhaps private media isn’t reviewed enough to archive inactive outlets. And really, if something is archived, it’s easy enough to bring it back if need be.
Any person in this position as the head of a private media organization and outside the MoC could potentially show the same biases allegedly possible to be shown by a member of the MoC. The threat of bias could perhaps be even greater, if one wishes to archive rival publications that have had a period of inactivity.
All that said, I do think it would be great for a private media organization to form to encourage training and collaboration among private media entities. A united press organization could do a lot in promoting private media within Europeia, especially private radio broadcasts, which we don’t really seem to have. It all seems to be EBC Radio. That’s fine…but it limits the opportunity for participation as in the past there have been some who wished to limit access to EBC Radio.
Bottom line at the bottom: I think a regional organization to promote private media would be great, just not sure it also needs to administer the individual outlets.
Any person in this position as the head of a private media organization and outside the MoC could potentially show the same biases allegedly possible to be shown by a member of the MoC. The threat of bias could perhaps be even greater, if one wishes to archive rival publications that have had a period of inactivity.
All that said, I do think it would be great for a private media organization to form to encourage training and collaboration among private media entities. A united press organization could do a lot in promoting private media within Europeia, especially private radio broadcasts, which we don’t really seem to have. It all seems to be EBC Radio. That’s fine…but it limits the opportunity for participation as in the past there have been some who wished to limit access to EBC Radio.
Bottom line at the bottom: I think a regional organization to promote private media would be great, just not sure it also needs to administer the individual outlets.
I am often guilty of that - I did read some/most of this thread...but points were made that I did want to reiterate, as well.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Teaching other people how to stop polluting Letho with their useless word vomit.Rand said:
I'm in, Nums, though I want to maintain focus on coordination between media outlets in the run up to major events. I'm also strongly opposed to the Director being elected by all member outlets. I think there should be a Board and that Board can elect a Chair or have a revolving Chair. I also didn't read your proposal all the way through so if any of that sounds weird, chalk it up to a lazy effort to understand what you're proposing. Either way, I'm very much in.
- Pronouns
- He/him
Either way works for me, as they both present advantages and risks. In any case, the first version of the structure/model will have faults and problems no one anticipated, so we'll be forced to amend/change/revisit it... so if it's bound to happen anyway, let's just start with something easy to manage and we'll plug the holes as we go along.
The Globe is not part of OIM and has no plans to join it, so it should be noted that OIM cannot purport to represent all private media. As such, the wording of proposals and so forth should be precise and accurate as I worry that some of these proposals and such are getting ahead of themselves.
You don't need to join ACME. And it leaves the application and archival to the status quo currently handled by MinComm. The Globe would literally see no change except that some (myself as one example) will push MinComm to remind newspaper owners to maintain activity (which currently is 60 days). Still, we'll leave it in their capable hands.