Public Access Channels provide local programming created the wide variety of individuals, groups and organizations within a community. They are noncommercial and the producer has full editorial control. Public Access channel's equipment and facilities are available for use on a first-come, first-served basis and the Cable operator may not exert any editorial control except over unproteced speech (e.g., obsenity, slander).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staten Isalnd Community Television (SICTV) was founded in 1983 as a result of a franchise agreement between the city of New York and Staten Island Cable (now Time Warner Cable). Permanently opened in 1988, SICTV is organized as a not-for-profit corporation under IRS Code 501C3 and currently has a sixteen member board of directors appointed by the Borough President of Staten Island.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sictv is funded through an agreement with Time Warner Cable. Funding is acquired via a quarterly payment on a per-scriber basis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SICTV is organized to provide public access service to the residents of the franchise area (Staten Island) on a Non-Discriminatory, first-come, first-served basis. .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SICTV operates on Time Warner Cable's Channels 34,35, 56 and 57. The facility includes 2 Studios 5 editing suites and a portable camera division. Click here for directions>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SICTV provides comprehensive television production training for eligible community members. Eligible members are defined as Staten Island Residents or individuals affiliated with Staten Island based Not-For-Profit Organizations. Volunteers, who assume all responsibility for materials submitted for cablecast, produce programming from start to finish. Access to channel space is on a First-Come,First-Served Basis. Equipment and channel useage is free of charge to eligible community members. SICTV also offers a FREE Electronic Videogram Messaging Service For Community Use.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Sunday, April 25, 2010
COMMUNICATION RIGHTS
Communication Rights
Background
With the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international community recognised the inherent dignity of all members of the human family by providing everyone with equal and inalienable rights. Communication rights are intrinsically bound up with the human condition and are based on a new, more powerful understanding of the implications of human rights and the role of communications. Without communication rights, human beings cannot live in freedom, justice, peace and dignity. The recognition of this universal human need has inspired us to set out a statement on communication rights based upon the key principles of Freedom, Inclusiveness, Diversity and Participation.
...
Communication rights remain for most of the world’s people a vision and an aspiration. They are not a reality on the ground. On the contrary, they are frequently and systematically violated. Governments must be constantly reminded that they are legally required under the human rights treaties they have ratified to implement, promote and protect communication rights. Communication rights are the expression of fundamental needs. The satisfaction of these needs requires a strong political will and the allocation of substantial resources. Lack of commitment to such resources serves only to deepen the global distrust of political institutions.
At the same time, full implementation of communication rights cannot depend only upon governments. Civil society has a key role to play in terms of advocacy for rights, in terms of monitoring and exposing rights abuse and in terms of educating and popularising rights.
Encouraging and facilitating people to assert these rights through different types of social action and to use them to realize the enormous potential of both the old and new technologies of media and communication, are vital tasks for all concerned people.
Excerpt from the Statement on Communication Rights.
Background
With the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international community recognised the inherent dignity of all members of the human family by providing everyone with equal and inalienable rights. Communication rights are intrinsically bound up with the human condition and are based on a new, more powerful understanding of the implications of human rights and the role of communications. Without communication rights, human beings cannot live in freedom, justice, peace and dignity. The recognition of this universal human need has inspired us to set out a statement on communication rights based upon the key principles of Freedom, Inclusiveness, Diversity and Participation.
...
Communication rights remain for most of the world’s people a vision and an aspiration. They are not a reality on the ground. On the contrary, they are frequently and systematically violated. Governments must be constantly reminded that they are legally required under the human rights treaties they have ratified to implement, promote and protect communication rights. Communication rights are the expression of fundamental needs. The satisfaction of these needs requires a strong political will and the allocation of substantial resources. Lack of commitment to such resources serves only to deepen the global distrust of political institutions.
At the same time, full implementation of communication rights cannot depend only upon governments. Civil society has a key role to play in terms of advocacy for rights, in terms of monitoring and exposing rights abuse and in terms of educating and popularising rights.
Encouraging and facilitating people to assert these rights through different types of social action and to use them to realize the enormous potential of both the old and new technologies of media and communication, are vital tasks for all concerned people.
Excerpt from the Statement on Communication Rights.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
FUNDING GRANTS COMMUNITY ACCESS TV
Funding
GRANT SUPPORT FOR COMMUNITY ACCESS TELEVISION STATIONS
"A federal grant is an award of financial assistance from a federal agency to a recipient to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States. Federal grants are not federal assistance or loans to individuals. Non-profit organizations, and government organizations like state governments, local governments, city or township governments, and special district governments are eligible to apply for government grants". (Grants.gov)
PEG Channels rely on grants to purchase capital expenditures for new equipment, and capital expenditures necessary to provide programming. "Successful grant writing involves the coordination of several activities, including planning, searching for data and resources, writing and packaging a proposal, submitting a proposal to a funder, and follow-up". (CPB Grant Proposal Writing Tips).
LIST OF TELEVISION GRANT PROVIDERS
• Grants.gov is your source to find and apply for federal government grants. Today, Grants.gov is a central storehouse for information on over 1,000 grant programs and provides access to approximately $400 billion in annual awards.
• Corporation For Public Broadcasting television grants are open to any station, person, or entity. The Greenhouse Fund competitively awards grants for industry training and professional development projects for public television professionals and independent producers.
• COS Funding Opportunities is a comprehensive database of more than 25,000 records representing over $33 billion in funding. Sponsors include private foundations, public agencies, national and local governments, corporations and more. Funding is offered for many purposes such as research, collaborations, travel, curriculum development, conferences, fellowships, postdoctoral positions, equipment acquisitions, capital or operating expenses.
• The Foundation for Technology Education (FTE) was established in 1986 as a nonprofit 501 (c )(3) organization, initiated a program of giving in 1993, in which awards are presented during the ITEA Annual Conference. FTE awards support programs that will: make our children technologically literate; transfer industrial and corporate research into our schools; produce models of excellence in technology teaching; create public awareness regarding the nature of technology education; and help technology teachers maintain a competitive edge in technology.
• The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation is a nonprofit, section 501(c)(3) philanthropic organization that seeks opportunities that can transform both communities and journalism, and help them reach their highest potential. The Knight Foundation wants to ensure that each community's citizens get the information they need to thrive in a democracy. The organization asks, as they evaluate opportunities and grants, "Is this truly transformational?" Nothing big happens without a big idea, and nothing new without a new idea.
• New Voices is a pioneering program to seed innovative community news ventures in the United States. Through 2008, New Voices is helping to fund the start-up of 40 micro-local news projects with $12,000 grants; support them with an educational Web site, and help foster their sustainability through $5,000 second-year matching grants. New Voices is administered by J-Lab at the University of Maryland and supported by a grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.
• National Association of Broadcasters grant program is intended to fund research on economic, business, social, and policy issues important to station managers and other decision-makers in the U.S. commercial broadcast industry. To that end, NAB recently offered $25,000 in research grants to academics, graduate students and senior undergraduates undertaking studies to further the broadcast industry. Grant consideration is given to research proposals focusing on economic, business, social or policy issues important to U.S. radio and television stations.
• National Telecommunications and Information Administration's Office of Telecommunications and Information Applications (OTIA) assists public and non-profit entities in effectively using telecommunications and information technologies to better provide public services and advance other national goals. In addition, the office is administering programs that are helping the nation's transition to digital television.
• The Public Telecommunications Facilities Program (PTFP) is a competitive grant program that helps public broadcasting stations, state and local governments, Indian Tribes, and nonprofit organizations construct facilities to bring educational and cultural programs to the American Public using broadcast and non-broadcast telecommunications technologies.
• Sony's company-wide philanthropic efforts reflect the diverse interests of their core businesses and focus on several distinct areas: arts education, arts and culture, health and human services, civic and community outreach, education, and volunteerism. While positive consideration is given to efforts that promote literacy and basic educational competency, the company also seeks to apply its financial, technological, and human resources to the encouragement of the creative, artistic, technical, and scientific skills required of tomorrow's workforce
Provided by PEGHUB.COM
GRANT SUPPORT FOR COMMUNITY ACCESS TELEVISION STATIONS
"A federal grant is an award of financial assistance from a federal agency to a recipient to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States. Federal grants are not federal assistance or loans to individuals. Non-profit organizations, and government organizations like state governments, local governments, city or township governments, and special district governments are eligible to apply for government grants". (Grants.gov)
PEG Channels rely on grants to purchase capital expenditures for new equipment, and capital expenditures necessary to provide programming. "Successful grant writing involves the coordination of several activities, including planning, searching for data and resources, writing and packaging a proposal, submitting a proposal to a funder, and follow-up". (CPB Grant Proposal Writing Tips).
LIST OF TELEVISION GRANT PROVIDERS
• Grants.gov is your source to find and apply for federal government grants. Today, Grants.gov is a central storehouse for information on over 1,000 grant programs and provides access to approximately $400 billion in annual awards.
• Corporation For Public Broadcasting television grants are open to any station, person, or entity. The Greenhouse Fund competitively awards grants for industry training and professional development projects for public television professionals and independent producers.
• COS Funding Opportunities is a comprehensive database of more than 25,000 records representing over $33 billion in funding. Sponsors include private foundations, public agencies, national and local governments, corporations and more. Funding is offered for many purposes such as research, collaborations, travel, curriculum development, conferences, fellowships, postdoctoral positions, equipment acquisitions, capital or operating expenses.
• The Foundation for Technology Education (FTE) was established in 1986 as a nonprofit 501 (c )(3) organization, initiated a program of giving in 1993, in which awards are presented during the ITEA Annual Conference. FTE awards support programs that will: make our children technologically literate; transfer industrial and corporate research into our schools; produce models of excellence in technology teaching; create public awareness regarding the nature of technology education; and help technology teachers maintain a competitive edge in technology.
• The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation is a nonprofit, section 501(c)(3) philanthropic organization that seeks opportunities that can transform both communities and journalism, and help them reach their highest potential. The Knight Foundation wants to ensure that each community's citizens get the information they need to thrive in a democracy. The organization asks, as they evaluate opportunities and grants, "Is this truly transformational?" Nothing big happens without a big idea, and nothing new without a new idea.
• New Voices is a pioneering program to seed innovative community news ventures in the United States. Through 2008, New Voices is helping to fund the start-up of 40 micro-local news projects with $12,000 grants; support them with an educational Web site, and help foster their sustainability through $5,000 second-year matching grants. New Voices is administered by J-Lab at the University of Maryland and supported by a grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.
• National Association of Broadcasters grant program is intended to fund research on economic, business, social, and policy issues important to station managers and other decision-makers in the U.S. commercial broadcast industry. To that end, NAB recently offered $25,000 in research grants to academics, graduate students and senior undergraduates undertaking studies to further the broadcast industry. Grant consideration is given to research proposals focusing on economic, business, social or policy issues important to U.S. radio and television stations.
• National Telecommunications and Information Administration's Office of Telecommunications and Information Applications (OTIA) assists public and non-profit entities in effectively using telecommunications and information technologies to better provide public services and advance other national goals. In addition, the office is administering programs that are helping the nation's transition to digital television.
• The Public Telecommunications Facilities Program (PTFP) is a competitive grant program that helps public broadcasting stations, state and local governments, Indian Tribes, and nonprofit organizations construct facilities to bring educational and cultural programs to the American Public using broadcast and non-broadcast telecommunications technologies.
• Sony's company-wide philanthropic efforts reflect the diverse interests of their core businesses and focus on several distinct areas: arts education, arts and culture, health and human services, civic and community outreach, education, and volunteerism. While positive consideration is given to efforts that promote literacy and basic educational competency, the company also seeks to apply its financial, technological, and human resources to the encouragement of the creative, artistic, technical, and scientific skills required of tomorrow's workforce
Provided by PEGHUB.COM
Sunday, April 11, 2010
A FOREIGN APPROACH TO COMMUNITY
I thought this article showed how the mainstream media operates in different countries and what restrictions they have to deal with thus having great effects on the communities both by building or destroying communities.
The United Nations’ role in Arab media
A voice for the community?
The United Nations has always demonstrated an interest in the Arab world and emphasised the need to find solutions for the political and social issues related to the area. The recent report by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the Arab Human Development Report 2003 (AHDR), is a reflection of this. According to this report, ‘[i]n most Arab countries, the media operate in an environment that sharply restricts freedom of the press and freedom of expression and opinion ... Censorship is rife and newspapers and television channels are sometimes arbitrarily closed down. Most media institutions are state-owned, particularly radio and television’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.3). The AHDR focuses on the lack of freedom in the Arab information environment.
Other reports also emphasise the need for the development of Arab media to promote and practice democracy, such as The Sana’a Declaration 2004, which was issued by the Inter-Governmental Regional Conference on Democracy, Human Rights and the Role of the International Criminal Court, held in Sana’a, Yemen, on 10-12 January 2004. The declaration stipulates that:
A free and independent media is essential for the promotion and protection of democracy and human rights. Pluralism in the media and its privatization are vital for contributing to the dissemination of human rights information, facilitating informed public participation, promoting tolerance and contributing to governmental accountability. The media should contribute effectively and responsibly towards the strengthening of democracy and human rights knowledge.
This report came as a continuation to The Sana’a Declaration 1999, which was issued at the end of the Emerging Democracies Forum held in Sana’a in July 1999, and which states that ‘[p]ublic participation in democratic decision making is enhanced by providing for private ownership of media and ensuring the impartiality of state-owned media through independent boards or other means’.
In light of these declarations, there clearly is awareness for the need to reform current Arab media practices to ensure that the media serve the people and in turn the people’s voice is heard. However there are no clear directions on how this reform is to be achieved and what form of media policy needs to be implemented.
Although there is a noticeable emerging public sphere as a result of new media technologies, there remains a significant digital divide. The internet ‘has created a small but important space for open debate. Of course the readers of … [the internet] represent the more educated sectors and are not fully representative of whole Arab societies’ (Hamzawy 2005, p.B07). The AHDR states that ‘the low number of Internet users in Arab countries is due to a number of factors, the most important of which are: computer and Internet illiteracy, the high cost of the lines used and high personal computer prices and access fees’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.64). Media channels need to be accessible to the majority of the people regardless of their social conditions.
There is a need for creating a space in the Arab media environment for a third media player, alongside government and commercial media, as a licensed community based broadcaster and press. It is worth considering therefore the Arab media setting and the possibility of the emergence of a third tier of media, where the community can freely aspire to freedom of speech that the AHDR requests. Third-sector media organisations, with the support of the community, can rise to fill a gap in the local Arab information environment. The economist Burton Weisbrod notes that not-for-profit organisations are funded by people who want more of a particular product or a different feature, and are prepared to pay for it (Weisbrod 1997). When the community owns the media, this logically leads to democracy. Community media are the citizens’ media.
However, before the question of the emergence of community media in the Arab world is raised, it is necessary to comprehend the current Arab media landscape in the face of a rapidly changing media environment.
Liberty of expression
The Arab media landscape has changed dramatically in the past 10 years, with particular emphasis on the growth of television satellite channels. Mamoun Fandy believes that despite the emergence of modern means of communication, there is still a disjunction between this phenomenon and the reality of Arab politics and societies (Fandy 2000, p.379). Naomi Sakr emphasises that Arab media are highly politicised and that accordingly government-controlled local media makes the coverage of local issues limited. Sakr states that ‘[s]atellite channels are aimed at the widest possible audience. They cannot do what the national terrestrial media should be doing. To sum up: the Arab media landscape has been revitalised but some more new elements, which are essential to free expression, have yet to emerge’ (Sakr 2003).
According to the AHDR, the media in the Arab world does not hold independent sources of information due to the media depending mainly on foreign sources of information. They rely on western news agencies, as news agencies in the Arab world are ‘stateowned and oriented to serve and promote state policies’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.60). Another issue that the AHDR highlights is the fact that:
[N]ews reports themselves tend to be narrative and descriptive, rather than investigative or analytic, with a concentration on immediate and partial events and facts. This is generally true of newspapers, radio bulletins and televised news. The news is often presented as a succession of isolated events, without in-depth explanatory coverage or any effort to place events in the general, social, economic and cultural context. (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.61)
These are common issues that mark the media in the Arab world and tend to lead to a media landscape that lacks the ability at this stage to provide a liberal, independent and local form of broadcasting. Although there is a growing phenomenon of privately owned media outlets, most Arab media institutions remain state-owned. Nevertheless any operating media enterprise is subject to state control, an issue that jeopardises freedom of thought and reasoning. In an area of high political activity this is crucial.
According to Edward Said, ‘[n]o society is entirely free of control over thought and expression, though not all such control is instituted and maintained by the government’ (Said 1996). Nevertheless, liberalism has defied the degree of government control and relied on the concept of civil society. The term ‘civil society’ often ‘refers to the arena of uncoerced collective action around shared interests, purposes and values. In theory, its institutional forms are distinct from those of the state, family and market …’ (What is Civil Society? 2005). Community broadcasting, as a third tier in the international media landscape, has become the voice of the people independent of private or state-owned media.
International Models of Community Media
In developing countries, community radio is seen as a powerful tool for conflict management and resolution. It acts as a potential agent for social change, and is perceived as an engine for democratisation. It is also an important tool for development. With a high rate of illiteracy in many developing regions, radio is in many circumstances the only affordable medium reaching large audiences. A distrust of government or state-owned public media in some countries has sanctioned the emergence of local community radio stations. In the West, community radio plays a smaller role in the wide media landscape, but it aims to realise targeted needs of certain community groups (Community Radio 2004).
Around the globe, grass-roots establishments have formed their own means of communication where the needed financial means could be obtained (World Broadcasting 2002). Community radio can thus be seen as part of a broader struggle for access to communications media. The idea of a right to communicate has gained support in the past 25 years and ‘includes the principles of access, participation and self-management in communications’ (Lewis 1984, p.17), which is based on a conception of media as instruments for social groups to reproduce and represent cultural identity, to voice social and economic demands and to create new social relations.
Until relatively recently South Africa had a tightly controlled broadcasting environment that was monopolised by the state-controlled South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC). In 1988 the Film and Allied Workers Organization (FAWO) was formed to focus on how to free the broadcasting environment from the effects of apartheid and to encourage a progressive broadcasting culture that offers a diversity of voices from a broad range of communities (Dowmunt 1993, p.90). Since the early 1990s, following the democratisation of the Republic of South Africa, the airwaves have been opened up. Community radio is rapidly being recognised as playing an important role in the development of civil society in South Africa by widely reaching the poor (ICASA 2003).
In Ireland community radio was a product of a pilot project that was established by the Irish Radio and Television Commission (IRTC) in 1994. This resulted in the licensing of 11 stations that were originally only allowed to broadcast until the end of 1996 but were then granted a one-year extension. The project led to the conclusion by the IRTC that community radio is a vital sector of Irish broadcasting (Price-Davies & Tacchi 2001, pp.38-40).
Italy’s Radio Popolare is an interesting model of community-based media due to its early experience in the democratisation of broadcasting. Radio Popolare began broadcasting in 1976 in Milan. During the 1980s the station moved away from its links to left organisations and trade unions to adopt a more independent stance. It was born of the convergence of interests between the broad and extreme left and the parliamentary left, in the autonomy of information (La Storia 2002). It is now considered to be one of the most important independent sources of information in the country.
As a result of its commitment to the public interest, Radio Popolare functions as a community radio station despite operating on a commercial licence, as all profit made is returned to the station; it is thus acting as a non-profit organisation. Radio Popolare started off as commercial radio, but, not wanting to rely on advertising alone, the station called on its audience to support Popolare by buying shares. Shares were issued to create a democratic structure in which the shareholders of Radio Popolare would have a say in the policy of the station (Laureys 2002). Starting from the early 1990s, Radio Popolare became controlled by the cooperation of workers and collaborators. Around 12,000 shareholders own 40,000 stocks of the company; this is an indication of the importance of listener support for the station.
Based on an interview conducted by Francois Laureys with the station director Marcello Lorrai in January 1999, one of the most popular programs broadcast on Popolare since 1976 is Microfono Aperto (Open Microphone), in which listeners respond via talkback to specific themes related to the news, involving the community at a time when talkback radio was not common.
In 1981 Radio Popolare established a network to exchange news programs with other radio stations elsewhere in Italy. This service started out with radio stations around Milan, and since 1995 the network has expanded via satellite to most of the major cities in north and central Italy. Currently 20 Italian radio stations make up the Popolare network, in Rome, Florence, Bologna, Venice, Verona, Torino and Bari. Stations from southern Italy were not included as there were fewer in quantity and most had extremely low budgets. However, Popolare aims to expand the network both geographically and in terms of input by raising the quantity and quality of regional news (Laureys 2002). Radio Popolare could serve as an example of the development of community radio on a commercial-based licence.
Yet there are some community stations that are continuously struggling in the face of government control. According to an article entitled Community Radio Muzzled by Stefania Milan, a Brazilian community radio station called Radio Restinga was shutdown in 2004 in Porto Alegre. In March 2004 only one frequency for community broadcasting was allocated in Brazil by a federal resolution. From around 5,500 and 10,000 community radios in Brazil, Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações (Anatel) only recognises 2,620 active radio channels, which include community radio stations (Community Radio Network 2005). According to Stefania Milan, the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) is preparing a campaign for the government to grant the Brazilians the right to communicate (Community Radio Network 2005).
As part of The Milan Declaration 1998, AMARC calls for ‘[i]nternational recognition of the community broadcasting sector as an essential form of public service broadcasting and a vital contributor to media pluralism and freedom of expression and information’. It is vital that freedom of expression in the form of community broadcasting continues to be encouraged and supported by the international community.
Australian/Arab Community Media
The establishment of Arabic community-based programming can be seen in the example of ethnic community radio in Australia, where, by comparison, there are fewer restrictions on programming content and more opportunity for a democratic outlook. There have been successful examples of Arabic community broadcasting in Australia, such as Melbourne Ethnic Community Radio – 3ZZZ.
As an ethnic community radio station, 3ZZZ services 58 ethnic communities with specialist programming. 3ZZZ started broadcasting on a regular basis in June 1989. Working from studios in the Melbourne suburb of Fitzroy, the station broadcasts 24 hours a day. It is estimated that more than 400,000 people listen to 3ZZZ every week (3ZZZ 2002).
Ethnic broadcasting in Australia goes back to 1973. The ethnic communities began to work together with sections of the wider Australian community, and threw their considerable strength and influence into the campaigns for access to the nation’s airwaves. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) had been encouraged by the Whitlam Government to open an ethnic ‘access’ station in Melbourne in 1975. The community access radio 3ZZ came into existence, owned and assisted by the ABC, with 20 ethnic communities being the first to broadcast in their ethnic languages (Dugdale 1979, p.37). In 1977 the Fraser Government closed down 3ZZ and eventually set up the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS), 12 years after 3ZZ’s closure. In August 1989, 3ZZZ, a community offshoot of 3ZZ, obtained its licence.
Many other community stations now provide ethnic access programming. According to the Community Broadcasting Foundation (CBF), ‘[t]here are 75 stations (35 metropolitan and 40 regional stations) in Australia that provide in excess of 1,200 hours per week of local programming in 86 languages. Over 2,500 volunteer broadcasters are involved in ethnic community radio in Australia’ (CBF 2002, p.2).
At 3ZZZ, up to 400 volunteers broadcast in 58 community languages. Some of these volunteer announcers have been with 3ZZ since its beginnings, hence representing the older generation. Some ethnic language groups have tried to accommodate a younger generation of broadcasters into their programs within their youth programming sections. Ethnic community stations are also providing an essential service to the new wave of migrants to Australia (Forde, Meadows & Foxwell 2002, p.ii).
The 16-member Council of the Ethnic Public Broadcasting Association of Victoria (EPBAV) is the governing body of 3ZZZ. A minimum of 25 people from an ethnic community can form an ethnic community broadcasting group at 3ZZZ, but groups need to have at least 40 financial members to be eligible for an hour of airtime. To comply with funding guidelines, ethnic programming must be mainly in a language other than English, contain no more than 50 percent music content, have a spoken word content of no more than 25 percent religious material or references, be locally produced under the auspices of a recognised local ethnic community language group, and broadcast between 6am and midnight (Ethnic Grant Funding 2002).
There are around seven Arabic language programs broadcasting on 3ZZZ; these are structured to provide Australian Arabs with news from their countries and also provide news to help them in their stay in Australia. The example of Arabic community broadcasting has been successful, allowing for an analytical approach to political events and social issues. The Australian government has also supported broadcast training to allow for new migrant groups to form localised language programs. Therefore, the possibility of having community based Arabic programming in the Arab world is not foreign, however a legal and legislative framework would need to be developed to work in accordance with the current media landscape in the Arab world.
Conclusion
There is a dire need for the creation of a legalised third tier in the Arab world where local communities can operate their own media that in turn would allow them to generate a public sphere that is necessary at this stage of development in the area. As the AHDR stipulates:
The conditions governing media ownership in Arab countries raise many questions about the real opportunities available to Arab citizens for exercising their right to issue newspapers, attain information, express thoughts and opinions and monitor government institutions. Another point of concern is the selective homogeneity of Arab media content, considering that diversity of information is an important prerequisite. (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.65)
Alternative media gives way for diverse voices to be heard. John Downing explains that, ‘[w]hen the mainstream media misrepresent social and political realities, then, again, alternative media come into their own. They provide an alternative public forum … to the official forum and the official story’ (Downing 1995, p.250). However, the extent to which the current legal and legislative media framework in the Arab world would allow for the development of community media remains a valid question.
Abdelwahab El-Affendi states that, ‘[n]ot only must independent media organizations be permitted, but they should be encouraged by unconditional government financial support, preferably dispensed through impartial institutions in accordance with agreed criteria and safeguards’ (El-Affendi 1993). This could be a valid transitional step for the emergence of community media; community media is a necessary stage in the development of Arab knowledge.
The establishment of community media falls under the final recommendation in the AHDR of the ‘five pillars of the knowledge society’, in which it is stated that there is a need for ‘[e]stablishing an authentic, broadminded and enlightened Arab general knowledge model’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.180). The media has a major role to play in the building of knowledge societies. The creation of a third tier could be that model, the model of community broadcasting.
The United Nations plays and continues to a play a vital role in the education of Arab nations for the sake of political, social and religious freedoms, which would normally be vented through various information channels. In the case of the Arab world, the Arab Human Development Report could become a basis for this aspiration.
Saba ElGhul-Bebawi has worked in the Arab world as a radio broadcaster and journalist, working for the English Service of Radio Jordan and freelancing for CNN. She has also worked as an administrator, broadcaster and trainer in various community radio stations in Australia. She completed her first MA on community radio analysis at Monash University, in Melbourne, and her second MA thesis on community media policy at Queensland University of Technology. She is a lecturer in Journalism and Communications at Monash University.
references
3ZZZ (2002) History, 3ZZZ Online (homepage of 3ZZZ Melbourne Ethnic Community Radio), www.3zzz.com.au/, accessed 7 October 2002.
Arab Human Development Report 2003, Building a Knowledge Society, United Nations Development Programme, Arab Fund for Social and Economic Development.
CBF (2002) Annual Report 2000/2001, www.cbf.com.au/publications.htm, accessed 2 October 2002.
Community Radio (2004) (homepage of Radio Netherlands), accessed 15 November 2004.
Community Radio Network (2005), accessed 20 February 2005.
Dowmunt, T. (1993) Channels of Resistance: Global Television and Local Empowerment, London: British Film Institute.
Downing, J. (1995) ‘Alternative media and the Boston Tea Party’, in J. Downing, A. Mohammadi & A. Sreberny-Mohammadi (eds) Questioning the Media: A Critical Introduction (2nd ed), California: Sage Publications, pp. 238-252.
Dugdale, J. (1979) Radio Power: A History of 3ZZ Access Radio, Melbourne: Hyland House.
El-Affendi, A. (1993) ‘Eclipse of reason: The media in the Muslim world’, Journal of International Affairs, New York, Summer, vol.47, iss.1, p.136, 31pp.
Ethnic Grant Funding (2002) CBF Online (homepage of Community Broadcasting Foundation), www.cbf.com.au/ethnic.htm, accessed 6 December 2002.
Fandy, M. (2000) ‘Information technology, trust, and social change in the Arab world’, The Middle East Journal, Washington, Summer, vol.54, iss.3, p.379, 17 pp.
Forde, S., Meadows, M. & Foxwell, K. (2002) Commitment Community: The Australian Community Radio Sector, Brisbane: Griffith University.
Hamzawy, A. (2005) ‘The real “Arab Street”,’ Washington Post, 6 February, p.B07.
ICASA (2003) Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Broadcasting Act, Chapter VI, Community Broadcasting, ICASA Online (homepage of Independent Communications Authority of South Africa) www.icasa.org.za/Default.asp?FromHome=1&Cmd=ViewContent&
ContentID=169, accessed 21 January 2003.
La Storia (2002), Radio Popolare Online (homepage of Radio Popolare), www.radiopopolare.it/, accessed 17 July 2002.
Laureys, F. (2002) Radio Popolare Milan, www.rnw.nl/realradio/community/html/popolare290199.html, accessed 28 April 2002.
Lewis, P. (1984) Media for People in Cities: A Study of Community Media in the Urban Context, Paris: UNESCO.
Price-Davies, E. & Tacchi, J. (2001) Community Radio in a Global Context: A Comparative Analysis, UK: Community Media Association.
Said, E. (1996) ‘The theory and practice of banning books and ideas’, Courier International, 17 October.
Sakr, N. (2003) ‘Specialist, Media and Development in the Middle East’, www.wemfmedia.org/documents/speech_sakr.PDF, accessed 29 January 2005.
The Milan Declaration 1998, 29 August, http://obsmedia.amarc.org/page.php?topic=
The+Milan+Declaration&wiki=amarc, accessed 20 January 2005.
The Sana’a Declaration 1999, www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/sanaa.htm, accessed 10 February 2005.
The Sana’a Declaration 2004, www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/reform/sanaa2004.htm, accessed 8 February 2005.
Weisbrod, B (1997) ‘The future of the nonprofit sector: Its entwining with private enterprise and government’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Hoboken, Fall, vol.16, iss.4, p.541.
What is Civil Society? (2005) (homepage of Centre for Civil Society, London School of Economics and Political Science), www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/what_is_civil_society.htm, accessed 11 February 2005.
World Broadcasting (2002) UNESCO Online (homepage of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, www.unesco.org/webworld/com/broadcasting.html, accessed 18 August 2002.
The United Nations’ role in Arab media
A voice for the community?
The United Nations has always demonstrated an interest in the Arab world and emphasised the need to find solutions for the political and social issues related to the area. The recent report by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the Arab Human Development Report 2003 (AHDR), is a reflection of this. According to this report, ‘[i]n most Arab countries, the media operate in an environment that sharply restricts freedom of the press and freedom of expression and opinion ... Censorship is rife and newspapers and television channels are sometimes arbitrarily closed down. Most media institutions are state-owned, particularly radio and television’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.3). The AHDR focuses on the lack of freedom in the Arab information environment.
Other reports also emphasise the need for the development of Arab media to promote and practice democracy, such as The Sana’a Declaration 2004, which was issued by the Inter-Governmental Regional Conference on Democracy, Human Rights and the Role of the International Criminal Court, held in Sana’a, Yemen, on 10-12 January 2004. The declaration stipulates that:
A free and independent media is essential for the promotion and protection of democracy and human rights. Pluralism in the media and its privatization are vital for contributing to the dissemination of human rights information, facilitating informed public participation, promoting tolerance and contributing to governmental accountability. The media should contribute effectively and responsibly towards the strengthening of democracy and human rights knowledge.
This report came as a continuation to The Sana’a Declaration 1999, which was issued at the end of the Emerging Democracies Forum held in Sana’a in July 1999, and which states that ‘[p]ublic participation in democratic decision making is enhanced by providing for private ownership of media and ensuring the impartiality of state-owned media through independent boards or other means’.
In light of these declarations, there clearly is awareness for the need to reform current Arab media practices to ensure that the media serve the people and in turn the people’s voice is heard. However there are no clear directions on how this reform is to be achieved and what form of media policy needs to be implemented.
Although there is a noticeable emerging public sphere as a result of new media technologies, there remains a significant digital divide. The internet ‘has created a small but important space for open debate. Of course the readers of … [the internet] represent the more educated sectors and are not fully representative of whole Arab societies’ (Hamzawy 2005, p.B07). The AHDR states that ‘the low number of Internet users in Arab countries is due to a number of factors, the most important of which are: computer and Internet illiteracy, the high cost of the lines used and high personal computer prices and access fees’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.64). Media channels need to be accessible to the majority of the people regardless of their social conditions.
There is a need for creating a space in the Arab media environment for a third media player, alongside government and commercial media, as a licensed community based broadcaster and press. It is worth considering therefore the Arab media setting and the possibility of the emergence of a third tier of media, where the community can freely aspire to freedom of speech that the AHDR requests. Third-sector media organisations, with the support of the community, can rise to fill a gap in the local Arab information environment. The economist Burton Weisbrod notes that not-for-profit organisations are funded by people who want more of a particular product or a different feature, and are prepared to pay for it (Weisbrod 1997). When the community owns the media, this logically leads to democracy. Community media are the citizens’ media.
However, before the question of the emergence of community media in the Arab world is raised, it is necessary to comprehend the current Arab media landscape in the face of a rapidly changing media environment.
Liberty of expression
The Arab media landscape has changed dramatically in the past 10 years, with particular emphasis on the growth of television satellite channels. Mamoun Fandy believes that despite the emergence of modern means of communication, there is still a disjunction between this phenomenon and the reality of Arab politics and societies (Fandy 2000, p.379). Naomi Sakr emphasises that Arab media are highly politicised and that accordingly government-controlled local media makes the coverage of local issues limited. Sakr states that ‘[s]atellite channels are aimed at the widest possible audience. They cannot do what the national terrestrial media should be doing. To sum up: the Arab media landscape has been revitalised but some more new elements, which are essential to free expression, have yet to emerge’ (Sakr 2003).
According to the AHDR, the media in the Arab world does not hold independent sources of information due to the media depending mainly on foreign sources of information. They rely on western news agencies, as news agencies in the Arab world are ‘stateowned and oriented to serve and promote state policies’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.60). Another issue that the AHDR highlights is the fact that:
[N]ews reports themselves tend to be narrative and descriptive, rather than investigative or analytic, with a concentration on immediate and partial events and facts. This is generally true of newspapers, radio bulletins and televised news. The news is often presented as a succession of isolated events, without in-depth explanatory coverage or any effort to place events in the general, social, economic and cultural context. (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.61)
These are common issues that mark the media in the Arab world and tend to lead to a media landscape that lacks the ability at this stage to provide a liberal, independent and local form of broadcasting. Although there is a growing phenomenon of privately owned media outlets, most Arab media institutions remain state-owned. Nevertheless any operating media enterprise is subject to state control, an issue that jeopardises freedom of thought and reasoning. In an area of high political activity this is crucial.
According to Edward Said, ‘[n]o society is entirely free of control over thought and expression, though not all such control is instituted and maintained by the government’ (Said 1996). Nevertheless, liberalism has defied the degree of government control and relied on the concept of civil society. The term ‘civil society’ often ‘refers to the arena of uncoerced collective action around shared interests, purposes and values. In theory, its institutional forms are distinct from those of the state, family and market …’ (What is Civil Society? 2005). Community broadcasting, as a third tier in the international media landscape, has become the voice of the people independent of private or state-owned media.
International Models of Community Media
In developing countries, community radio is seen as a powerful tool for conflict management and resolution. It acts as a potential agent for social change, and is perceived as an engine for democratisation. It is also an important tool for development. With a high rate of illiteracy in many developing regions, radio is in many circumstances the only affordable medium reaching large audiences. A distrust of government or state-owned public media in some countries has sanctioned the emergence of local community radio stations. In the West, community radio plays a smaller role in the wide media landscape, but it aims to realise targeted needs of certain community groups (Community Radio 2004).
Around the globe, grass-roots establishments have formed their own means of communication where the needed financial means could be obtained (World Broadcasting 2002). Community radio can thus be seen as part of a broader struggle for access to communications media. The idea of a right to communicate has gained support in the past 25 years and ‘includes the principles of access, participation and self-management in communications’ (Lewis 1984, p.17), which is based on a conception of media as instruments for social groups to reproduce and represent cultural identity, to voice social and economic demands and to create new social relations.
Until relatively recently South Africa had a tightly controlled broadcasting environment that was monopolised by the state-controlled South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC). In 1988 the Film and Allied Workers Organization (FAWO) was formed to focus on how to free the broadcasting environment from the effects of apartheid and to encourage a progressive broadcasting culture that offers a diversity of voices from a broad range of communities (Dowmunt 1993, p.90). Since the early 1990s, following the democratisation of the Republic of South Africa, the airwaves have been opened up. Community radio is rapidly being recognised as playing an important role in the development of civil society in South Africa by widely reaching the poor (ICASA 2003).
In Ireland community radio was a product of a pilot project that was established by the Irish Radio and Television Commission (IRTC) in 1994. This resulted in the licensing of 11 stations that were originally only allowed to broadcast until the end of 1996 but were then granted a one-year extension. The project led to the conclusion by the IRTC that community radio is a vital sector of Irish broadcasting (Price-Davies & Tacchi 2001, pp.38-40).
Italy’s Radio Popolare is an interesting model of community-based media due to its early experience in the democratisation of broadcasting. Radio Popolare began broadcasting in 1976 in Milan. During the 1980s the station moved away from its links to left organisations and trade unions to adopt a more independent stance. It was born of the convergence of interests between the broad and extreme left and the parliamentary left, in the autonomy of information (La Storia 2002). It is now considered to be one of the most important independent sources of information in the country.
As a result of its commitment to the public interest, Radio Popolare functions as a community radio station despite operating on a commercial licence, as all profit made is returned to the station; it is thus acting as a non-profit organisation. Radio Popolare started off as commercial radio, but, not wanting to rely on advertising alone, the station called on its audience to support Popolare by buying shares. Shares were issued to create a democratic structure in which the shareholders of Radio Popolare would have a say in the policy of the station (Laureys 2002). Starting from the early 1990s, Radio Popolare became controlled by the cooperation of workers and collaborators. Around 12,000 shareholders own 40,000 stocks of the company; this is an indication of the importance of listener support for the station.
Based on an interview conducted by Francois Laureys with the station director Marcello Lorrai in January 1999, one of the most popular programs broadcast on Popolare since 1976 is Microfono Aperto (Open Microphone), in which listeners respond via talkback to specific themes related to the news, involving the community at a time when talkback radio was not common.
In 1981 Radio Popolare established a network to exchange news programs with other radio stations elsewhere in Italy. This service started out with radio stations around Milan, and since 1995 the network has expanded via satellite to most of the major cities in north and central Italy. Currently 20 Italian radio stations make up the Popolare network, in Rome, Florence, Bologna, Venice, Verona, Torino and Bari. Stations from southern Italy were not included as there were fewer in quantity and most had extremely low budgets. However, Popolare aims to expand the network both geographically and in terms of input by raising the quantity and quality of regional news (Laureys 2002). Radio Popolare could serve as an example of the development of community radio on a commercial-based licence.
Yet there are some community stations that are continuously struggling in the face of government control. According to an article entitled Community Radio Muzzled by Stefania Milan, a Brazilian community radio station called Radio Restinga was shutdown in 2004 in Porto Alegre. In March 2004 only one frequency for community broadcasting was allocated in Brazil by a federal resolution. From around 5,500 and 10,000 community radios in Brazil, Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações (Anatel) only recognises 2,620 active radio channels, which include community radio stations (Community Radio Network 2005). According to Stefania Milan, the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) is preparing a campaign for the government to grant the Brazilians the right to communicate (Community Radio Network 2005).
As part of The Milan Declaration 1998, AMARC calls for ‘[i]nternational recognition of the community broadcasting sector as an essential form of public service broadcasting and a vital contributor to media pluralism and freedom of expression and information’. It is vital that freedom of expression in the form of community broadcasting continues to be encouraged and supported by the international community.
Australian/Arab Community Media
The establishment of Arabic community-based programming can be seen in the example of ethnic community radio in Australia, where, by comparison, there are fewer restrictions on programming content and more opportunity for a democratic outlook. There have been successful examples of Arabic community broadcasting in Australia, such as Melbourne Ethnic Community Radio – 3ZZZ.
As an ethnic community radio station, 3ZZZ services 58 ethnic communities with specialist programming. 3ZZZ started broadcasting on a regular basis in June 1989. Working from studios in the Melbourne suburb of Fitzroy, the station broadcasts 24 hours a day. It is estimated that more than 400,000 people listen to 3ZZZ every week (3ZZZ 2002).
Ethnic broadcasting in Australia goes back to 1973. The ethnic communities began to work together with sections of the wider Australian community, and threw their considerable strength and influence into the campaigns for access to the nation’s airwaves. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) had been encouraged by the Whitlam Government to open an ethnic ‘access’ station in Melbourne in 1975. The community access radio 3ZZ came into existence, owned and assisted by the ABC, with 20 ethnic communities being the first to broadcast in their ethnic languages (Dugdale 1979, p.37). In 1977 the Fraser Government closed down 3ZZ and eventually set up the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS), 12 years after 3ZZ’s closure. In August 1989, 3ZZZ, a community offshoot of 3ZZ, obtained its licence.
Many other community stations now provide ethnic access programming. According to the Community Broadcasting Foundation (CBF), ‘[t]here are 75 stations (35 metropolitan and 40 regional stations) in Australia that provide in excess of 1,200 hours per week of local programming in 86 languages. Over 2,500 volunteer broadcasters are involved in ethnic community radio in Australia’ (CBF 2002, p.2).
At 3ZZZ, up to 400 volunteers broadcast in 58 community languages. Some of these volunteer announcers have been with 3ZZ since its beginnings, hence representing the older generation. Some ethnic language groups have tried to accommodate a younger generation of broadcasters into their programs within their youth programming sections. Ethnic community stations are also providing an essential service to the new wave of migrants to Australia (Forde, Meadows & Foxwell 2002, p.ii).
The 16-member Council of the Ethnic Public Broadcasting Association of Victoria (EPBAV) is the governing body of 3ZZZ. A minimum of 25 people from an ethnic community can form an ethnic community broadcasting group at 3ZZZ, but groups need to have at least 40 financial members to be eligible for an hour of airtime. To comply with funding guidelines, ethnic programming must be mainly in a language other than English, contain no more than 50 percent music content, have a spoken word content of no more than 25 percent religious material or references, be locally produced under the auspices of a recognised local ethnic community language group, and broadcast between 6am and midnight (Ethnic Grant Funding 2002).
There are around seven Arabic language programs broadcasting on 3ZZZ; these are structured to provide Australian Arabs with news from their countries and also provide news to help them in their stay in Australia. The example of Arabic community broadcasting has been successful, allowing for an analytical approach to political events and social issues. The Australian government has also supported broadcast training to allow for new migrant groups to form localised language programs. Therefore, the possibility of having community based Arabic programming in the Arab world is not foreign, however a legal and legislative framework would need to be developed to work in accordance with the current media landscape in the Arab world.
Conclusion
There is a dire need for the creation of a legalised third tier in the Arab world where local communities can operate their own media that in turn would allow them to generate a public sphere that is necessary at this stage of development in the area. As the AHDR stipulates:
The conditions governing media ownership in Arab countries raise many questions about the real opportunities available to Arab citizens for exercising their right to issue newspapers, attain information, express thoughts and opinions and monitor government institutions. Another point of concern is the selective homogeneity of Arab media content, considering that diversity of information is an important prerequisite. (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.65)
Alternative media gives way for diverse voices to be heard. John Downing explains that, ‘[w]hen the mainstream media misrepresent social and political realities, then, again, alternative media come into their own. They provide an alternative public forum … to the official forum and the official story’ (Downing 1995, p.250). However, the extent to which the current legal and legislative media framework in the Arab world would allow for the development of community media remains a valid question.
Abdelwahab El-Affendi states that, ‘[n]ot only must independent media organizations be permitted, but they should be encouraged by unconditional government financial support, preferably dispensed through impartial institutions in accordance with agreed criteria and safeguards’ (El-Affendi 1993). This could be a valid transitional step for the emergence of community media; community media is a necessary stage in the development of Arab knowledge.
The establishment of community media falls under the final recommendation in the AHDR of the ‘five pillars of the knowledge society’, in which it is stated that there is a need for ‘[e]stablishing an authentic, broadminded and enlightened Arab general knowledge model’ (Arab Human Development Report 2003, p.180). The media has a major role to play in the building of knowledge societies. The creation of a third tier could be that model, the model of community broadcasting.
The United Nations plays and continues to a play a vital role in the education of Arab nations for the sake of political, social and religious freedoms, which would normally be vented through various information channels. In the case of the Arab world, the Arab Human Development Report could become a basis for this aspiration.
Saba ElGhul-Bebawi has worked in the Arab world as a radio broadcaster and journalist, working for the English Service of Radio Jordan and freelancing for CNN. She has also worked as an administrator, broadcaster and trainer in various community radio stations in Australia. She completed her first MA on community radio analysis at Monash University, in Melbourne, and her second MA thesis on community media policy at Queensland University of Technology. She is a lecturer in Journalism and Communications at Monash University.
references
3ZZZ (2002) History, 3ZZZ Online (homepage of 3ZZZ Melbourne Ethnic Community Radio), www.3zzz.com.au/, accessed 7 October 2002.
Arab Human Development Report 2003, Building a Knowledge Society, United Nations Development Programme, Arab Fund for Social and Economic Development.
CBF (2002) Annual Report 2000/2001, www.cbf.com.au/publications.htm, accessed 2 October 2002.
Community Radio (2004) (homepage of Radio Netherlands), accessed 15 November 2004.
Community Radio Network (2005), accessed 20 February 2005.
Dowmunt, T. (1993) Channels of Resistance: Global Television and Local Empowerment, London: British Film Institute.
Downing, J. (1995) ‘Alternative media and the Boston Tea Party’, in J. Downing, A. Mohammadi & A. Sreberny-Mohammadi (eds) Questioning the Media: A Critical Introduction (2nd ed), California: Sage Publications, pp. 238-252.
Dugdale, J. (1979) Radio Power: A History of 3ZZ Access Radio, Melbourne: Hyland House.
El-Affendi, A. (1993) ‘Eclipse of reason: The media in the Muslim world’, Journal of International Affairs, New York, Summer, vol.47, iss.1, p.136, 31pp.
Ethnic Grant Funding (2002) CBF Online (homepage of Community Broadcasting Foundation), www.cbf.com.au/ethnic.htm, accessed 6 December 2002.
Fandy, M. (2000) ‘Information technology, trust, and social change in the Arab world’, The Middle East Journal, Washington, Summer, vol.54, iss.3, p.379, 17 pp.
Forde, S., Meadows, M. & Foxwell, K. (2002) Commitment Community: The Australian Community Radio Sector, Brisbane: Griffith University.
Hamzawy, A. (2005) ‘The real “Arab Street”,’ Washington Post, 6 February, p.B07.
ICASA (2003) Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Broadcasting Act, Chapter VI, Community Broadcasting, ICASA Online (homepage of Independent Communications Authority of South Africa) www.icasa.org.za/Default.asp?FromHome=1&Cmd=ViewContent&
ContentID=169, accessed 21 January 2003.
La Storia (2002), Radio Popolare Online (homepage of Radio Popolare), www.radiopopolare.it/, accessed 17 July 2002.
Laureys, F. (2002) Radio Popolare Milan, www.rnw.nl/realradio/community/html/popolare290199.html, accessed 28 April 2002.
Lewis, P. (1984) Media for People in Cities: A Study of Community Media in the Urban Context, Paris: UNESCO.
Price-Davies, E. & Tacchi, J. (2001) Community Radio in a Global Context: A Comparative Analysis, UK: Community Media Association.
Said, E. (1996) ‘The theory and practice of banning books and ideas’, Courier International, 17 October.
Sakr, N. (2003) ‘Specialist, Media and Development in the Middle East’, www.wemfmedia.org/documents/speech_sakr.PDF, accessed 29 January 2005.
The Milan Declaration 1998, 29 August, http://obsmedia.amarc.org/page.php?topic=
The+Milan+Declaration&wiki=amarc, accessed 20 January 2005.
The Sana’a Declaration 1999, www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/sanaa.htm, accessed 10 February 2005.
The Sana’a Declaration 2004, www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/reform/sanaa2004.htm, accessed 8 February 2005.
Weisbrod, B (1997) ‘The future of the nonprofit sector: Its entwining with private enterprise and government’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Hoboken, Fall, vol.16, iss.4, p.541.
What is Civil Society? (2005) (homepage of Centre for Civil Society, London School of Economics and Political Science), www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/what_is_civil_society.htm, accessed 11 February 2005.
World Broadcasting (2002) UNESCO Online (homepage of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, www.unesco.org/webworld/com/broadcasting.html, accessed 18 August 2002.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
WEB 2.0
Background on Web 2.0
What is Web 2.0?
There has been a lot of chatter about Web 2.0, as if the Internet is a versioned software application.
So what is Web 2.0?
Simply put, Web 2.0 is a perceived transition of the web to web applications. Web 2.0 is the next generation of technology solutions where interactive content is the norm. There is no agreement on exactly what Web 2.0 means, depending on who you are speaking with, you may receive different explanations. At it's heart, Web 2.0 is about the maturity of the Web and businesses that are thriving online. While many refer to Web 2.0 as companies that employ powerful web technologies, the key components of the new web are said to include: the web as a platform, collaboration, and syndication.
The Evolution of the Internet
The commercial web began as static html pages, and has progressed to well established sites created from content management systems. Most large websites contain dynamic content that is constantly changing, often the information provided is interactive or user specific. Amazon's recommended products is an excellent example of the future, where web surfers receive personalized content based on their past surfing habits.
Web 2.0 is said to be the technological evolution. O'Reilly indicates that the dot-com bubble burst signified the beginning of Web 2.0 and a new generation of technology applications. The shakeout from the dot-com collapse pre-empted the technological revolution of Web 2.0. The dot-com companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have a few things in common. The first primary principle that the Web 2.0 companies share is that they use the power of the web to collaborate and grow. O'Reilly further defines Web 2.0 as a set of core principles and practices, with the primary principle being a thought process that the web is a platform.
Web 2.0 companies are said to not be constrained by traditional business models and philosophies. The hidden web, which is a fancy way of saying the technology behind the content that the web surfer sees, is becoming more and more powerful. Scripting languages that allow webmasters to employ technology and interact with users based on personal decisions or responses has personalized the Internet. While O'Reilly clearly outlines elements and components of Web 2.0, I think the general meaning that Web 2.0 is synonymous with the new generation of the Web.
While the techie types "got it", many casual web surfers have not grasped the fact that the Internet is not versioned software. Which in effect has meant that Web 2.0's meaning is limited to the evolution of the Internet and online business. Whether that means personalized content and user choice, or dynamically generated content that is ranked by weighing the websites popularity, the Internet is growing up.
What is Web 2.0?
There has been a lot of chatter about Web 2.0, as if the Internet is a versioned software application.
So what is Web 2.0?
Simply put, Web 2.0 is a perceived transition of the web to web applications. Web 2.0 is the next generation of technology solutions where interactive content is the norm. There is no agreement on exactly what Web 2.0 means, depending on who you are speaking with, you may receive different explanations. At it's heart, Web 2.0 is about the maturity of the Web and businesses that are thriving online. While many refer to Web 2.0 as companies that employ powerful web technologies, the key components of the new web are said to include: the web as a platform, collaboration, and syndication.
The Evolution of the Internet
The commercial web began as static html pages, and has progressed to well established sites created from content management systems. Most large websites contain dynamic content that is constantly changing, often the information provided is interactive or user specific. Amazon's recommended products is an excellent example of the future, where web surfers receive personalized content based on their past surfing habits.
Web 2.0 is said to be the technological evolution. O'Reilly indicates that the dot-com bubble burst signified the beginning of Web 2.0 and a new generation of technology applications. The shakeout from the dot-com collapse pre-empted the technological revolution of Web 2.0. The dot-com companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have a few things in common. The first primary principle that the Web 2.0 companies share is that they use the power of the web to collaborate and grow. O'Reilly further defines Web 2.0 as a set of core principles and practices, with the primary principle being a thought process that the web is a platform.
Web 2.0 companies are said to not be constrained by traditional business models and philosophies. The hidden web, which is a fancy way of saying the technology behind the content that the web surfer sees, is becoming more and more powerful. Scripting languages that allow webmasters to employ technology and interact with users based on personal decisions or responses has personalized the Internet. While O'Reilly clearly outlines elements and components of Web 2.0, I think the general meaning that Web 2.0 is synonymous with the new generation of the Web.
While the techie types "got it", many casual web surfers have not grasped the fact that the Internet is not versioned software. Which in effect has meant that Web 2.0's meaning is limited to the evolution of the Internet and online business. Whether that means personalized content and user choice, or dynamically generated content that is ranked by weighing the websites popularity, the Internet is growing up.
SEATTLE COMMUNITY NETWORK
I'm not sure what it is about Seattle, but again for this weeks blog I head west in search of a community network set-up that works. A major reason for a successful community network center is commitment, as you will see below:
Seattle Community Network
Principles
The Seattle Community Network (SCN) is a free public-access computer network for exchanging and accessing information. Beyond that, however, it is a service conceived for community empowerment. Our principles are a series of commitments to help guide the ongoing development and management of the system for both the organizers and participating individuals and organizations.
Commitment to Access
Access to the SCN will be free to all
· We will provide access to all groups of people particularly those without ready access to information technology.
· We will provide access to people with diverse needs. This may include special-purpose interfaces.
· We will make the SCN accessible from public places.
Commitment to Service
The SCN will offer reliable and responsive service
· We will provide information that is timely and useful to the community.
· We will provide access to databases and other services.
Commitment to Democracy
The SCN will promote participation in government and public dialogue
· The community will be actively involved in the ongoing development of the SCN.
· We will place high value in freedom of speech and expression and in the free exchange of ideas.
· We will make every effort to ensure privacy of the system users.
· We will support democratic use of electronic technology.
Commitment to the World Community
In addition to serving the local community, we will become part of the regional, national and international community
· We will build a system that can serve as a model for other communities.
Commitment to the Future
We will continue to evolve and improve the SCN
· We will explore the use of innovative applications such as electronic town halls for community governance, or electronic encyclopedias for enhanced access to information.
· We will work with information providers and with groups involved in similar projects using other media.
· We will solicit feedback on the technology as it is used, and make it as accessible and humane as possible.
Seattle Community Network
Principles
The Seattle Community Network (SCN) is a free public-access computer network for exchanging and accessing information. Beyond that, however, it is a service conceived for community empowerment. Our principles are a series of commitments to help guide the ongoing development and management of the system for both the organizers and participating individuals and organizations.
Commitment to Access
Access to the SCN will be free to all
· We will provide access to all groups of people particularly those without ready access to information technology.
· We will provide access to people with diverse needs. This may include special-purpose interfaces.
· We will make the SCN accessible from public places.
Commitment to Service
The SCN will offer reliable and responsive service
· We will provide information that is timely and useful to the community.
· We will provide access to databases and other services.
Commitment to Democracy
The SCN will promote participation in government and public dialogue
· The community will be actively involved in the ongoing development of the SCN.
· We will place high value in freedom of speech and expression and in the free exchange of ideas.
· We will make every effort to ensure privacy of the system users.
· We will support democratic use of electronic technology.
Commitment to the World Community
In addition to serving the local community, we will become part of the regional, national and international community
· We will build a system that can serve as a model for other communities.
Commitment to the Future
We will continue to evolve and improve the SCN
· We will explore the use of innovative applications such as electronic town halls for community governance, or electronic encyclopedias for enhanced access to information.
· We will work with information providers and with groups involved in similar projects using other media.
· We will solicit feedback on the technology as it is used, and make it as accessible and humane as possible.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
SEATTLE INDYMEDIA
With all the talk about Boston's Indymedia, I thought I would present the first of the Indymedia's Seattle. Their history and editorial policy which I found to be interesting:
SEATTLE INDYMEDIA
History
The Independent Media Center (www.indymedia.org), was established by various independent and alternative media organizations and activists in 1999 for the purpose of providing grassroots coverage of the World Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle. The center acted as a clearinghouse of information for journalists, and provided up-to-the-minute reports, photos, audio and video footage through its website. Using the collected footage, the Seattle Independent Media Center (seattle.indymedia.org) produced a series of five documentaries, uplinked every day to satellite and distributed throughout the United States to public access stations.
The center also produced its own newspaper, distributed throughout Seattle and to other cities via the internet, as well as hundreds of audio segments, transmitted through the web and Studio X, a 24-hour micro and internet radio station based in Seattle. The site, which used a democratic open-publishing system, logged more than 2 million hits, and was featured on America Online, Yahoo, CNN, BBC Online, and numerous other sites. Through a decentralized and autonomous network, hundreds of media activists setup independent media centers in London, Canada, Mexico City, Prague, Belgium, France, and Italy over the next year. IMCs have since been established on every continent, with more to come.
Editorial Policy
The Seattle Independent Media Center (here after SEAIMC) is an open collective of grassroots journalists dedicated to providing an open outlet for non-corporate news and analysis.
The SEAIMC is an organization that strives to work with all mediums, including print, audio, video, and internet. The website at http://seattle.indymedia.org/ is the online outlet of the organization's reporting.
The SEAIMC is affiliated with the global Indymedia movement. This network works to foster media creation based upon the principles of free participation and association, mutual aid, open-source software, open publishing, and transparent decision-making. As an affiliate of the Indymedia network, the SEAIMC remains committed to these principles.
The website operates two basic media dissemination structures: feature stories and the open newswire.
Feature stories, which are found in the center column of the website, are written and/or selected by members of the SEAIMC collective. These features represent the organization's daily output of news and editorial content. Seattle-area and Washington stories and issues are the focus of features, although regional and global stories are published as well. Features are typically based on content published on the open publishing newswire.
The open publishing newswire appears in the right-hand column of the website, and works as the basic means through which any participant can contribute news and editorial content to the SEAIMC website. Text, photo, audio, video, and several other types of files are publishable on the newswire.
The online newswire is designed to empower individuals to become independent and civic journalists by providing a direct, unmoderated forum for presenting media, including text articles, audio and video recordings, and photographs, to the public via the Internet. Within that general framework, we specifically encourage individuals to publish:
· Well-researched, timely articles
· Investigative reports exposing injustice
· Coverage of Seattle-area and Washington state issues
· Stories on events affecting underrepresented groups
· Media produced from within underrepresented groups
· Stories on issues ignored by the mainstream media
· Stories on people or projects working towards social and economic justice.
· Eyewitness accounts of progressive actions and demonstrations
· Media analysis
The newswire is a democratic forum designed to make available important stories, news, and opinions with local relevance. The newswire operates on the principle of "open publishing" meaning that anyone with access to the Internet can post articles, photographs, audio and video to the newswire without prior editorial approval. SEAIMC is dedicated to maintaining the newswire as a completely open forum. However, the editorial collective regularly watches the newswire, intervening on rare occasions to maintain its usefulness as a media resource and as a welcoming community space.
Content published on the newswire is not endorsed by the SEAIMC, and is subject to a basic editorial policy designed to facilitate open media-making while preventing obfuscation of the newswire as a media dissemination device.
The intent of the newswire is to enable independent reporters to publish news and commentary on contemporary social and political issues. Published material that abuses the editorial policy is liable to be hidden. Published content may also be grouped together if their subject matter is related. Hidden content is not visible on the front newswire archives, and is not included in the website search function. The decision to hide is made by individual SEAIMC collective members who are empowered to implement the editorial policy.
The SEAIMC reserves the right to hide newswire posts that:
1. Advertise commercial services or products
2. Are repetitive or duplicates
3. Contain or link to pornographic content
4. Publicize or advocate actions that actively endanger human or animal safety
5. Use language, imagery or other forms of communication that promote bigotry and/or hatred based upon gender, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, religion, class, age, physical or developmental ability, or national origin.
6. Contain content that has been published on multiple IMC newswires
7. Repostings of corporate media content that is available elsewhere on the internet, or excerpts of previously published material.
8. Appear in an unreadable format (e.g., posts posted as test) or are titled "test"
9. Are obviously false or misleading in terms of author, location, time, or actors. This includes attempts to spread disinformation or impersonate another individual.
10. Are unintelligible (e.g., containing numerous spelling or grammatical errors).
11. Are off-topic or are not news.
12. Are flamebaits made with the intention of provoking argument and/or limiting constructive dialog.
13. Are otherwise inconsistent with the general mission of this website, which is to use media production and distribution as tools for promoting social and economic justice in the Seattle-area and Washington State.
Published content that is included in any of the above categories may be hidden at the discretion of the SEAIMC. The hiding of articles, however, does not indicate that unhidden articles are endorsed by the SEAIMC.
The newswire is a tool intended to facilitate grassroots media dissemination, and the SEAIMC will actively strive to work as a community-based participatory media organization.
SEATTLE INDYMEDIA
History
The Independent Media Center (www.indymedia.org), was established by various independent and alternative media organizations and activists in 1999 for the purpose of providing grassroots coverage of the World Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle. The center acted as a clearinghouse of information for journalists, and provided up-to-the-minute reports, photos, audio and video footage through its website. Using the collected footage, the Seattle Independent Media Center (seattle.indymedia.org) produced a series of five documentaries, uplinked every day to satellite and distributed throughout the United States to public access stations.
The center also produced its own newspaper, distributed throughout Seattle and to other cities via the internet, as well as hundreds of audio segments, transmitted through the web and Studio X, a 24-hour micro and internet radio station based in Seattle. The site, which used a democratic open-publishing system, logged more than 2 million hits, and was featured on America Online, Yahoo, CNN, BBC Online, and numerous other sites. Through a decentralized and autonomous network, hundreds of media activists setup independent media centers in London, Canada, Mexico City, Prague, Belgium, France, and Italy over the next year. IMCs have since been established on every continent, with more to come.
Editorial Policy
The Seattle Independent Media Center (here after SEAIMC) is an open collective of grassroots journalists dedicated to providing an open outlet for non-corporate news and analysis.
The SEAIMC is an organization that strives to work with all mediums, including print, audio, video, and internet. The website at http://seattle.indymedia.org/ is the online outlet of the organization's reporting.
The SEAIMC is affiliated with the global Indymedia movement. This network works to foster media creation based upon the principles of free participation and association, mutual aid, open-source software, open publishing, and transparent decision-making. As an affiliate of the Indymedia network, the SEAIMC remains committed to these principles.
The website operates two basic media dissemination structures: feature stories and the open newswire.
Feature stories, which are found in the center column of the website, are written and/or selected by members of the SEAIMC collective. These features represent the organization's daily output of news and editorial content. Seattle-area and Washington stories and issues are the focus of features, although regional and global stories are published as well. Features are typically based on content published on the open publishing newswire.
The open publishing newswire appears in the right-hand column of the website, and works as the basic means through which any participant can contribute news and editorial content to the SEAIMC website. Text, photo, audio, video, and several other types of files are publishable on the newswire.
The online newswire is designed to empower individuals to become independent and civic journalists by providing a direct, unmoderated forum for presenting media, including text articles, audio and video recordings, and photographs, to the public via the Internet. Within that general framework, we specifically encourage individuals to publish:
· Well-researched, timely articles
· Investigative reports exposing injustice
· Coverage of Seattle-area and Washington state issues
· Stories on events affecting underrepresented groups
· Media produced from within underrepresented groups
· Stories on issues ignored by the mainstream media
· Stories on people or projects working towards social and economic justice.
· Eyewitness accounts of progressive actions and demonstrations
· Media analysis
The newswire is a democratic forum designed to make available important stories, news, and opinions with local relevance. The newswire operates on the principle of "open publishing" meaning that anyone with access to the Internet can post articles, photographs, audio and video to the newswire without prior editorial approval. SEAIMC is dedicated to maintaining the newswire as a completely open forum. However, the editorial collective regularly watches the newswire, intervening on rare occasions to maintain its usefulness as a media resource and as a welcoming community space.
Content published on the newswire is not endorsed by the SEAIMC, and is subject to a basic editorial policy designed to facilitate open media-making while preventing obfuscation of the newswire as a media dissemination device.
The intent of the newswire is to enable independent reporters to publish news and commentary on contemporary social and political issues. Published material that abuses the editorial policy is liable to be hidden. Published content may also be grouped together if their subject matter is related. Hidden content is not visible on the front newswire archives, and is not included in the website search function. The decision to hide is made by individual SEAIMC collective members who are empowered to implement the editorial policy.
The SEAIMC reserves the right to hide newswire posts that:
1. Advertise commercial services or products
2. Are repetitive or duplicates
3. Contain or link to pornographic content
4. Publicize or advocate actions that actively endanger human or animal safety
5. Use language, imagery or other forms of communication that promote bigotry and/or hatred based upon gender, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, religion, class, age, physical or developmental ability, or national origin.
6. Contain content that has been published on multiple IMC newswires
7. Repostings of corporate media content that is available elsewhere on the internet, or excerpts of previously published material.
8. Appear in an unreadable format (e.g., posts posted as test) or are titled "test"
9. Are obviously false or misleading in terms of author, location, time, or actors. This includes attempts to spread disinformation or impersonate another individual.
10. Are unintelligible (e.g., containing numerous spelling or grammatical errors).
11. Are off-topic or are not news.
12. Are flamebaits made with the intention of provoking argument and/or limiting constructive dialog.
13. Are otherwise inconsistent with the general mission of this website, which is to use media production and distribution as tools for promoting social and economic justice in the Seattle-area and Washington State.
Published content that is included in any of the above categories may be hidden at the discretion of the SEAIMC. The hiding of articles, however, does not indicate that unhidden articles are endorsed by the SEAIMC.
The newswire is a tool intended to facilitate grassroots media dissemination, and the SEAIMC will actively strive to work as a community-based participatory media organization.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
PROMETHEUS RADIO PROJECT:
In relation to our discussions this week, I came across a non-profit organization that works with community organizations across the country to build and operate their own low power FM radio station. This group was orignally started because of their views that mainstream media often provides a narrow view of important issues that face our communities by highlighting the voices of those they consider to be “experts.” These “experts” often claim authority while ignoring those that are most impacted by the topic at hand. The following is a brief interview with "Prometheus Radio Project" to give you an idea what they are all about:
If you’re sick of stale corporate radio and desperate for local alternatives, you may have heard of the Prometheus Radio Project. The Philadelphia-based nonprofit collective—dedicated to empowering communities and spurring social change through community radio—is a proud antidote to the canned corporate sounds of Clear Channel and other radio behemoths.
More than 10 years after a small group of activists with roots in the pirate radio movement founded Prometheus, the organization is working hard to protect existing low-power FM (LPFM) stations from an industry lawsuit and helping the bipartisan Local Community Radio Act, which would open up more radio spectrum space for nonprofit LPFM stations, finally become law.
But Prometheus’ staff and volunteers are also firmly embedded in the grassroots, lending their skills and energy to community groups ready to build a radio station. Since 2002, collective members have traveled around the country for radio “barn raisings,” helping to raise antennae masts, construct studios and build local, vibrant alternatives to an increasingly centralized and corporatized media landscape.
Prometheus staff members Cory Fischer-Hoffman, Andy Gunn, Andalusia Knoll, Anthony Mazza, Sakura Saunders and Pete Tridish corresponded via e-mail with In These Times in early April.
In 25 words or less, what makes you so special? (Keep in mind that humility, while admirable, is boring).
We are a collectively run nonprofit organization of media activists, organizers and techies fighting for participatory community radio.
What’s the first thing that comes up when your name is Googled?
Our organization’s Web site comes up, along with the Media Ownership Lawsuit in which Prometheus sued the FCC for their attempt to trash the few remaining regulations preventing complete monopoly ownership of our media. We won, and that David and Goliath story has made national headlines and is one small step toward ending the corporate domination of our media.
Shamelessly plug a colleague’s project.
Prometheus works with community organizations across the country to build and operate their own low-power FM radio stations. We worked with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) to build and operate their own radio station. The CIW farm-workers in southwestern Florida have won campaigns for better wages and working conditions against the largest fast food corporations in the country. They are currently battling against modern-day slavery in Florida’s fields and taking on food suppliers like Aramark and Sysco to demand an end to exploitation.
Describe your politics
We are collectively run because we believe that all people’s voices should be heard. We work with social justice organizations that are parts of a larger social movement fighting for self-determination. We believe that we live in an outrageously unequal and unjust society and that those most affected by these imbalances must be at the forefront of changing this system and bringing about justice. We recognize that more democratic access and ownership of the media plays an essential role in this process.
Name a journalist whose work you read religiously. Why?
Seymour Hersh. It’s unfortunately so rare to see a journalist who has worked so long and is so well-respected in the “industry” and still speaks truth to power. Helen Thomas comes to mind as well.
What is your favorite In These Times story?
Well, that’s easy: “Mo’ Power for Low Power.” This piece features the Chicago Independent Radio Project—which, along with other groups across the country, is eager to see our airwaves open up for more community radio stations.
What’s a mistake the mainstream media always makes that really gets under your skin?
Mainstream media often provides a narrow view of important issues that face our communities by highlighting the voices of those they consider to be “experts.” These “experts” often claim authority while ignoring those that are most impacted by the topic at hand.
What’s your favorite Web-based tool for your job? Give us a quick walk through on how to use it.
We love the Prometheus maptool. This was created by a former intern-extraordinaire, and it links to all of the low-power FM radio stations on the air. Check it out!
What’s one piece of legislation (state or national) you’d like to see passed right now?
We are working hard, teaming up with grassroots folks from across the country and media justice and reform organizations from the beltway and beyond to pass the 2009 Local Community Radio Act. This important piece of legislation will expand low-power FM radio to cities, towns and suburbs across the country, opening up the airwaves for hundreds or potentially thousands of new, non-commercial, local, participatory community radio stations.
Are you involved with any interesting forms of activism? Could you tell us about any of these projects?
We are working with people across the country to pass city council resolutions in support of expanding low-power FM radio. Resolutions have been advanced in Urbana-Champaign, Ill.; Hartford, Conn.; Boston, Mass.; Lake Worth, Fla.; Minneapolis, Minn.; and Frankfort, Ky. We are also asking people to sign LPFM Now! Postcards and mail them into their Representatives. Phone calls, e-mails, letters, meetings and surprise visits to congressional offices are an important part of this campaign as well.
How can others get involved?
Call your congressperson right now! Tell them that you support The Local Community Radio Act (HR 1147 & S592), and ask them to cosponsor this legislation as a sign of support for community media.
What campaign should we all sign on to right now?
Join the campaign to expand LPFM. Check out our Web site and get involved. Download a city council resolutions toolkit.
What local media do you depend on?
Prometheus is based in Philadelphia, and the dearth of community media here is what got Prometheus activists involved in these issues in the first place. A few years back however, we were honored to play a role in the re-launch of Philadelphia’s only historical community radio station, WPEB, a progressive, local media outlet serving West Philadelphia.
Have you ever had any run-ins with the law that you’d like to share?
Prometheus grew out of the pirate radio scene, so collectively we’ve had lots of run-ins with the law.
In relation to our discussions this week, I came across a non-profit organization that works with community organizations across the country to build and operate their own low power FM radio station. This group was orignally started because of their views that mainstream media often provides a narrow view of important issues that face our communities by highlighting the voices of those they consider to be “experts.” These “experts” often claim authority while ignoring those that are most impacted by the topic at hand. The following is a brief interview with "Prometheus Radio Project" to give you an idea what they are all about:
If you’re sick of stale corporate radio and desperate for local alternatives, you may have heard of the Prometheus Radio Project. The Philadelphia-based nonprofit collective—dedicated to empowering communities and spurring social change through community radio—is a proud antidote to the canned corporate sounds of Clear Channel and other radio behemoths.
More than 10 years after a small group of activists with roots in the pirate radio movement founded Prometheus, the organization is working hard to protect existing low-power FM (LPFM) stations from an industry lawsuit and helping the bipartisan Local Community Radio Act, which would open up more radio spectrum space for nonprofit LPFM stations, finally become law.
But Prometheus’ staff and volunteers are also firmly embedded in the grassroots, lending their skills and energy to community groups ready to build a radio station. Since 2002, collective members have traveled around the country for radio “barn raisings,” helping to raise antennae masts, construct studios and build local, vibrant alternatives to an increasingly centralized and corporatized media landscape.
Prometheus staff members Cory Fischer-Hoffman, Andy Gunn, Andalusia Knoll, Anthony Mazza, Sakura Saunders and Pete Tridish corresponded via e-mail with In These Times in early April.
In 25 words or less, what makes you so special? (Keep in mind that humility, while admirable, is boring).
We are a collectively run nonprofit organization of media activists, organizers and techies fighting for participatory community radio.
What’s the first thing that comes up when your name is Googled?
Our organization’s Web site comes up, along with the Media Ownership Lawsuit in which Prometheus sued the FCC for their attempt to trash the few remaining regulations preventing complete monopoly ownership of our media. We won, and that David and Goliath story has made national headlines and is one small step toward ending the corporate domination of our media.
Shamelessly plug a colleague’s project.
Prometheus works with community organizations across the country to build and operate their own low-power FM radio stations. We worked with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) to build and operate their own radio station. The CIW farm-workers in southwestern Florida have won campaigns for better wages and working conditions against the largest fast food corporations in the country. They are currently battling against modern-day slavery in Florida’s fields and taking on food suppliers like Aramark and Sysco to demand an end to exploitation.
Describe your politics
We are collectively run because we believe that all people’s voices should be heard. We work with social justice organizations that are parts of a larger social movement fighting for self-determination. We believe that we live in an outrageously unequal and unjust society and that those most affected by these imbalances must be at the forefront of changing this system and bringing about justice. We recognize that more democratic access and ownership of the media plays an essential role in this process.
Name a journalist whose work you read religiously. Why?
Seymour Hersh. It’s unfortunately so rare to see a journalist who has worked so long and is so well-respected in the “industry” and still speaks truth to power. Helen Thomas comes to mind as well.
What is your favorite In These Times story?
Well, that’s easy: “Mo’ Power for Low Power.” This piece features the Chicago Independent Radio Project—which, along with other groups across the country, is eager to see our airwaves open up for more community radio stations.
What’s a mistake the mainstream media always makes that really gets under your skin?
Mainstream media often provides a narrow view of important issues that face our communities by highlighting the voices of those they consider to be “experts.” These “experts” often claim authority while ignoring those that are most impacted by the topic at hand.
What’s your favorite Web-based tool for your job? Give us a quick walk through on how to use it.
We love the Prometheus maptool. This was created by a former intern-extraordinaire, and it links to all of the low-power FM radio stations on the air. Check it out!
What’s one piece of legislation (state or national) you’d like to see passed right now?
We are working hard, teaming up with grassroots folks from across the country and media justice and reform organizations from the beltway and beyond to pass the 2009 Local Community Radio Act. This important piece of legislation will expand low-power FM radio to cities, towns and suburbs across the country, opening up the airwaves for hundreds or potentially thousands of new, non-commercial, local, participatory community radio stations.
Are you involved with any interesting forms of activism? Could you tell us about any of these projects?
We are working with people across the country to pass city council resolutions in support of expanding low-power FM radio. Resolutions have been advanced in Urbana-Champaign, Ill.; Hartford, Conn.; Boston, Mass.; Lake Worth, Fla.; Minneapolis, Minn.; and Frankfort, Ky. We are also asking people to sign LPFM Now! Postcards and mail them into their Representatives. Phone calls, e-mails, letters, meetings and surprise visits to congressional offices are an important part of this campaign as well.
How can others get involved?
Call your congressperson right now! Tell them that you support The Local Community Radio Act (HR 1147 & S592), and ask them to cosponsor this legislation as a sign of support for community media.
What campaign should we all sign on to right now?
Join the campaign to expand LPFM. Check out our Web site and get involved. Download a city council resolutions toolkit.
What local media do you depend on?
Prometheus is based in Philadelphia, and the dearth of community media here is what got Prometheus activists involved in these issues in the first place. A few years back however, we were honored to play a role in the re-launch of Philadelphia’s only historical community radio station, WPEB, a progressive, local media outlet serving West Philadelphia.
Have you ever had any run-ins with the law that you’d like to share?
Prometheus grew out of the pirate radio scene, so collectively we’ve had lots of run-ins with the law.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
NJN TELEVISION
With what I believe to be the most impotant factor in public access television, FUNDING !!
I found information on New Jersey's statewide public television. Below is a short history of the station. Along with that and myself being in the finance area, I thought it would be interesting to see the station's financial records. I think you will find these financial statements very interesting .
The History of NJN
"And away we go. This is WNJT-TV, the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority, Channel 52, Trenton." With those words on April 5, 1971, New Jersey's first and only statewide public television station went on the air. Since then, the network has grown to become one of the nation's top producers of local programming in the PBS system. This award-winning station embodies public television's mission to educate, inform and empower citizens by providing quality programming for all ages and serving as a valuable community resource.
In 1961, WNET-TV moved from Newark to New York City, leaving New Jersey without a television station of its own.
In 1968, the state Legislature established the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority and passed the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority Act. Voters approved a $7.5 million bond issue to construct four transmitters and a broadcast complex. The Act was signed into law on January 13, 1969 by Governor Richard J. Hughes.
By 1971, the network, known as New Jersey Public Television (NJPTV) was on the air with newscasts and instructional programming used by elementary, high school and college students.
In 1972, WNJS-TV, Channel 23, Camden, was added. A year later, WNJM-TV, Channel 50, Montclair and WNJB-TV, Channel 58, New Brunswick, were in operation, giving the network its full complement of four UHF stations serving the entire state with one signal.
1972 also saw the formation of The Friends of NJPTV, a group composed of New Jerseyans interested in helping the network with fundraising activities, and the first printing of Jerseyvision magazine, a precursor to the current NJN Guide. The network opened a Newark news bureau in 1973 and in 1980, a South Jersey bureau was established at Richard Stockton State College in Pomona.
The network officially changed its name to New Jersey Network (NJN) in 1981.
In 1984, NJN received its first Emmy Awards.
Throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s, NJN continued its community outreach efforts with award-winning productions, including Battered Wives, Shattered Lives in 1985; Throwaway Pets in 1993; and Endangered Flight: The Birds of Siberia in 1995. It has produced many acclaimed public affairs specials.
In 1990, The Foundation for New Jersey Public Broadcasting was established to sponsor activities and raise funds to support NJN, replacing its predecessor, The Friends of NJPTV.
To enhance NJN's tradition of excellence, NJN Radio established its first station, WNJT, Trenton, 88.1 FM, in 1991. Since then, NJN Radio has grown to a network of seven transmitters covering all of New Jersey with programming produced by NJN, as well as national programming from such sources as National Public Radio and Public Radio International.
In July 1993, the network left the former bowling alley in Ewing Township it had called home for more than 20 years for new headquarters: a state-of-the-art broadcasting and production facility located at 25 South Stockton Street in Trenton.
Throughout the 1990s, NJN has remained one of the nation's top producers of local programming among public television stations and has continued to produce documentaries focusing on topics important to New Jerseyans. NJN News covers the politics, education, New Jersey Statehouse, health and medical affairs, environmental issues, youth violence, urban affairs, sports and business in the Garden State.
The network reached landmark agreements with The Television Food Network in 1995 and Atlantic Microsystems, Inc. in 1996, which will add to the network's support over the next 10 years. NJN also held two benefits in 1995 and 1996.
Since its inception in 1989, The Production Center at NJN, the network's media productions department, has seen a steady rise in activity. In 1996, the department attracted the national children's series, Bloopy's Buddies, to NJN studios.
Since 1971, NJN has informed and engaged New Jersey citizens with compelling portraits of the Garden State and ambitious community outreach efforts. By promoting positive change in the community with quality programming and partnerships with community groups and leaders, NJN continues to evolve as one of the country's leading public television stations.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR NJN TV.......
http://www.njn.net/about/NJPBAaudit2008.pdf
I found information on New Jersey's statewide public television. Below is a short history of the station. Along with that and myself being in the finance area, I thought it would be interesting to see the station's financial records. I think you will find these financial statements very interesting .
The History of NJN
"And away we go. This is WNJT-TV, the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority, Channel 52, Trenton." With those words on April 5, 1971, New Jersey's first and only statewide public television station went on the air. Since then, the network has grown to become one of the nation's top producers of local programming in the PBS system. This award-winning station embodies public television's mission to educate, inform and empower citizens by providing quality programming for all ages and serving as a valuable community resource.
In 1961, WNET-TV moved from Newark to New York City, leaving New Jersey without a television station of its own.
In 1968, the state Legislature established the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority and passed the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority Act. Voters approved a $7.5 million bond issue to construct four transmitters and a broadcast complex. The Act was signed into law on January 13, 1969 by Governor Richard J. Hughes.
By 1971, the network, known as New Jersey Public Television (NJPTV) was on the air with newscasts and instructional programming used by elementary, high school and college students.
In 1972, WNJS-TV, Channel 23, Camden, was added. A year later, WNJM-TV, Channel 50, Montclair and WNJB-TV, Channel 58, New Brunswick, were in operation, giving the network its full complement of four UHF stations serving the entire state with one signal.
1972 also saw the formation of The Friends of NJPTV, a group composed of New Jerseyans interested in helping the network with fundraising activities, and the first printing of Jerseyvision magazine, a precursor to the current NJN Guide. The network opened a Newark news bureau in 1973 and in 1980, a South Jersey bureau was established at Richard Stockton State College in Pomona.
The network officially changed its name to New Jersey Network (NJN) in 1981.
In 1984, NJN received its first Emmy Awards.
Throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s, NJN continued its community outreach efforts with award-winning productions, including Battered Wives, Shattered Lives in 1985; Throwaway Pets in 1993; and Endangered Flight: The Birds of Siberia in 1995. It has produced many acclaimed public affairs specials.
In 1990, The Foundation for New Jersey Public Broadcasting was established to sponsor activities and raise funds to support NJN, replacing its predecessor, The Friends of NJPTV.
To enhance NJN's tradition of excellence, NJN Radio established its first station, WNJT, Trenton, 88.1 FM, in 1991. Since then, NJN Radio has grown to a network of seven transmitters covering all of New Jersey with programming produced by NJN, as well as national programming from such sources as National Public Radio and Public Radio International.
In July 1993, the network left the former bowling alley in Ewing Township it had called home for more than 20 years for new headquarters: a state-of-the-art broadcasting and production facility located at 25 South Stockton Street in Trenton.
Throughout the 1990s, NJN has remained one of the nation's top producers of local programming among public television stations and has continued to produce documentaries focusing on topics important to New Jerseyans. NJN News covers the politics, education, New Jersey Statehouse, health and medical affairs, environmental issues, youth violence, urban affairs, sports and business in the Garden State.
The network reached landmark agreements with The Television Food Network in 1995 and Atlantic Microsystems, Inc. in 1996, which will add to the network's support over the next 10 years. NJN also held two benefits in 1995 and 1996.
Since its inception in 1989, The Production Center at NJN, the network's media productions department, has seen a steady rise in activity. In 1996, the department attracted the national children's series, Bloopy's Buddies, to NJN studios.
Since 1971, NJN has informed and engaged New Jersey citizens with compelling portraits of the Garden State and ambitious community outreach efforts. By promoting positive change in the community with quality programming and partnerships with community groups and leaders, NJN continues to evolve as one of the country's leading public television stations.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR NJN TV.......
http://www.njn.net/about/NJPBAaudit2008.pdf
Sunday, February 21, 2010
THE TIMOTHY SMITH NETWORK
THE TIMOTHY SMITH NETWORK
I came across this Community Technology Center located in Massachusetts and thought I would share what I think is our communities greatest resource, our children. The future of this country and our communities begin with the development of our youth. The Timothy Smith Network provides its services to 3,000 students monthly in an effort to better educate and develop the kids of the Greater Roxbury area, a good model to follow. Below is their story.
The Timothy Smith Network (TSN) is a collaborative community computer technology centers working together to help the residents of Roxbury, Massachusetts and its surrounding neighborhoods (hereafter, Greater Roxbury) to build the technological skills, confidence and knowledge required to be successful in the information economy. The TSN provides broad-based support to its member centers designed to ensure that the technology programs and services available to Greater Roxbury residents are of a high and consistent quality and are responsive to resident needs. Each month, Timothy Smith (TS) Centers provide free or low-cost technology-related programs and services to nearly 3,000 students and address a broad range of economic, therapeutic, health, educational, training, human and social service needs of the community. The TSN seeks to provide a model for the development and implementation of coordinated community technology center planning and service delivery in densely populated low-income urban communities.The TS Centers were originally launched in 1997 through grants from the Timothy Smith Fund for “Old Roxbury”, a charitable trust managed by the City of Boston Trust Office. The Fund has authorized grants totaling $2,400,00 to community-based non-profit organizations in “Old Roxbury” for the creation of 40 computer-learning centers. Defined as the boundaries of Roxbury in 1858, “Old Roxbury,” includes the Roxbury neighborhood of Boston, and a portion of the neighboring Jamaica Plain, Fenway-Kenmore, Dorchester and the South End. In addition to start-up funds for TS Centers, the Fund provides regular computer hardware and furnishing upgrades in the sites through 2019. The TSN was established in 2002 to coordinate the services and leverage the collective technical, financial and intellectual resources of the TS Centers to ensure that services and programs offered meet resident needs and are of high and consistent quality. The TSN supports TS Centers to deliver effective technology training and services by: identifying and developing collaborative program and funding opportunities; providing broad-based technical, financial and operational capacity building support to the centers; promoting cross-center cooperation and peer learning through joint trainings and workshops; facilitating the exchange of information among centers through its listserv and website; and developing performance and learning outcomes standards to ensure that all member centers are providing consistent technology programs and services.Since 2002, the TSN has established an impressive track record for managing large-scale grants and funds. The TSN was designated by the City of Boston Trust Office to administer an estimated $500,000 in annual hardware and furniture upgrades for the TS Centers on behalf of the Timothy Smith Fund beginning in 2003. Programmatically, the TSN has partnered with Kinetic City, Science Quest and the MIT Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research (MKI) to bring high-quality science after school programs to TS Centers for youth in grades 3 through 12. Through these partnerships, the TSN has provided high quality after school programming for the benefit of over 4800 Roxbury youth during the past two years.
http://www.timothysmithnetwork.org/TSN/centers-about.htm
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Community Radio - Fordham University
Reading thru the material this week in Community Media, I tried to think back when I first started to listen to community radio. Johnson stated in our readings that "community radio first appeared in San Francisco in the 1940's with the creation of the Pacifica Foundation's KPFA radio station. (Johnson. 5) My first recall of community radio was when I was in High School in the mid 70's.....There was no sports talk radio back then, like that have now 24 hours a day. But being from New Jersey I was about 30 minutes from Fordham University in the Bronx, New York. On Sunday nights when the wave lengths were with me, I could pick up their signal. I remember how much I enjoyed listening and I also remember the nights they used to have their on air fund raisers to collect money to keep the station up and going. It's funny because, I'm sure the college guys and that station are now part of the sports talk radio we hear today.
The below are some interesting facts about the station, their financial reports and a timeline that shows a history or the radio station. I was surprised to see the first broadcast was back in 1947. Enjoy the facts below:
About WFUV
The location, the people, the contact info.
Where we are:
WFUV, Fordham University, Bronx, NY 10458-9993 718 365-9815 fax Phone: 718 817-4550 main line 718 365-8111 membership Plus: 718 817-4535 WFUV Member Line Giveaways for 'FUV members Submit CDs to: WFUV Music Department at the address above - Call Wednesdays 5-7pm for feedback
Who we are:
WFUV is a non-commercial, listener-supported public radio station, licensed to Fordham University for 60 years. Serving nearly 350,000 listeners each week in the New York area and thousands more worldwide on the web, and a leader in contemporary music radio, WFUV offers an eclectic mix of rock, singer-songwriters, blues, world and other music, plus headlines from National Public Radio, local news and sports and Metro Traffic.
The Alternate Side: WFUV launched a music channel online and on HD at 90.7 FM in the New York City area, in December of 2008. It includes a blend of established and emerging NYC-based indie rock, electronica, world, dance and other musical hybrids. The Alternate Side is supported in part by The New York State Music Fund, established by the New York State Attorney General at Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, and by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
More info:
E-Newsletter Signup - Weekly 'Direct from WFUV' notes
Write Us - Send a comment or question
FUV on Facebook - Our page, fans, groups
Staff Directory - Contact info for everybody
Maps and Directions - To Fordham's Rose Hill campus
Awards & Honors - Professional and student accomplishments
Job Opportunities - Check for openings
Privacy & Security - Information and technical policies
WFUV Timeline - Milestones of our first 60 years
Our licensee: Fordham University
WFUV's Statement of Goals
Governing and Advisory Bodies
Public Documents:
EEO Public File Report: Vacancies and Recruitment - July 1, 2007 - August 17, 2009 [PDF format]
EEO Public File
Application For FM Broadcast Station License
EEO General Policy
EEO Outreach Activities
Financials: 2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 (PDF format)
About WFUV:
WFUV Timeline: 1947-2007
Some highlights of WFUV's first 60 years on the air.
Take a Look Back:
1947The first broadcast (July 7) with Robert Henabury hosting a musical show; Vince Scully and Raymond Rahner are the first sports play by play announcers (Oct. 3); Formal Dedication (Oct. 26), with Arthur Godfrey as Master of Ceremonies and Cardinal Spellman presiding
1952Off the air for two months due to lack of funds
1953Charlie "Osgood" Wood's No Soap Opera program is billed in The Ram as "the soap opera to end all soap operas"
1954WFUV begins broadcasting in stereo
1955Neil Maffeo's Jazz Scene program broadcasts a concert by Dave Brubeck and Carmen McRae from Carnegie Hall. Dick Schwende (later known professionally as Dick Summer) lends a helping hand in the broadcast.
1962The station receives a $30,000 grant from an anonymous foundation; Sal Marchiano and Tom Moran announce the home basketball games over WFUV
1963The Time Capsule (later known as Group Harmony Review) debuts
1964Campus Caravan, hosted by Pete Fornatale, debuts
1966New transmitter increases power
1970Daily rock programming begins
1973The first Big Broadcast with Rich Conaty as host
1974Ceol na nGael debuts during fundraiser
1975One on One, New York's longest-running sports call-in show, debuts
1986A Thousand Welcomes with Kathleen Biggins debuts
1988City Folk debuts in November as three-hour show, 9 AM-Noon, between college rock and The Classical Concert; WFUV becomes public radio station, receiving support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; The World Café debuts with WFUV as one of its pilot stations
1991Afternoon show with Darren DeVivo begins in January
1993City Folk now heard from 6:30am-6:00pm; Ben Soper hosts new evening mix from 8:00-11:00pm; Corny O'Connell joins City Folk as afternoon host
1994Rita Houston joins City Folk in March as midday host; WFUV adds hourly NPR news headlines
1997City Folk Sunday Breakfast debuts
1998First City Folk Live disc of in-studio performances
1999Woody's Children comes to WFUV
2000WFUV begins streaming at wfuv.org; Dennis Elsas joins 90.7 as afternoon host
2001City Folk Morning with Claudia Marshall and Julianne Welby debuts; Pete Fornatale and Vin Scelsa come to WFUV from 4pm to midnight on Saturday
2005After 58 years squeezed into space on the third floor of Keating Hall, WFUV moves into new, state-of-the-art broadcast center on ground floor of Keating.
2006Antenna is moved to top of 30-story building at Montefiore Medical Center, resolving 13-year dispute with the New York Botanical Garden; WFUV begins first podcasts
2007WFUV is awarded $500,000 grant from the New York State Music Fund to develop a second program stream for younger listeners
Sites referenced:
http://www.wfuv.org/about/fordham/index.html
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Definition of Community
DEFINITION OF COMMUNITY
Submitted by: Joe Smolensky (CMT-220 Spring 2010) Section CE1-01
There are several descriptions unto what a community actually is. A close look at all those definitions however point out and capture certain points without which a community would not be existent (Andy, 3). A community is a body of people having common rights, privileges, or interests, or living in the same place under the same laws and regulations (Peter, 21). It could also be used to refer to a number of animals living in a common home or with some apparent association of interests (Peter, 23). Biologically, a community could be described as a collection of organisms that in one way or another interact within a common environment (Andy, 17).
The first definition of a community was put ahead by Aristotle who described it as a group of established men having shared values (Andy, 10). Through time, technology has brought about changes, so that people in the world can easily belong to a number of communities at the same time. These are communities of place, communities of memory in which case members share a history, cultural communities, and psychological communities, Peter explains.
In general, when addressing people, a community could be the society, a commonwealth or state, a body politic, the general public, or just people (Peter, 27).
There are various characteristics of a community. In a community, there is the aspect of place, otherwise describing a sense of locale or boundaries (Andy, 33). For a community to exist, it must be within an identifiable location such as a city, a place of work, a township or even a district (Peter, 51). A community is also characterized by the sense of sharing common perspectives. For people to be described as belonging to a
community, they must be sharing some values, needs, norms, suffering, religion, happiness, and interests together (Andy, 38). Experts have established that such factors have been shared for a long period of time, say centuries.
In a community, there is the aspect of joint actions, where special bonds bring the people together- friendship, families and even working environments (Peter, 49).
In all communities of the world, there exists community spirit, though variable from a region to another (Andy, 51). All communities hold some ideas about themselves, and always identify themselves by them. In all cases, the people have positive notions, they view their community as one with a great future and this always enables them to give great contribution to the community in whatever form (Andy, 55). All persons who identify themselves with a community always sacrifice to it in the welfare.
Another major attitude in people belonging to a community is loyalty (Peter, 80). The persons always have some goodwill for the general good and always abide by it. They have a good expression of optimism, in that they know right behind their minds the community holds good for them. The attitudes are portrayed in the individual behavior, coupled by their unity and therefore contributing to the common good.
In any community however, leadership is very important. All successful communities call for coordination by a person or a team that is unanimously recognized. Such leaders are expected to steer the community ahead in the right direction. They are persons of integrity, lead by example and operate within the set norms or community ethics. For a community to be bound together, it requires proper means of conflict
resolution incase need arises (Andy, 80). Once in a while, the members cross each others’ paths, which is a normal practice. The community leaders come in and solve such misunderstandings so that the people live in harmony.
References
Peter, B. Community: The Structure of Belonging: San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, Inc., 2008
Andy, S. Creating Community: Five Keys to Building a Small Group Culture. USA: Multnomah Publishers, 2004
Submitted by: Joe Smolensky (CMT-220 Spring 2010) Section CE1-01
There are several descriptions unto what a community actually is. A close look at all those definitions however point out and capture certain points without which a community would not be existent (Andy, 3). A community is a body of people having common rights, privileges, or interests, or living in the same place under the same laws and regulations (Peter, 21). It could also be used to refer to a number of animals living in a common home or with some apparent association of interests (Peter, 23). Biologically, a community could be described as a collection of organisms that in one way or another interact within a common environment (Andy, 17).
The first definition of a community was put ahead by Aristotle who described it as a group of established men having shared values (Andy, 10). Through time, technology has brought about changes, so that people in the world can easily belong to a number of communities at the same time. These are communities of place, communities of memory in which case members share a history, cultural communities, and psychological communities, Peter explains.
In general, when addressing people, a community could be the society, a commonwealth or state, a body politic, the general public, or just people (Peter, 27).
There are various characteristics of a community. In a community, there is the aspect of place, otherwise describing a sense of locale or boundaries (Andy, 33). For a community to exist, it must be within an identifiable location such as a city, a place of work, a township or even a district (Peter, 51). A community is also characterized by the sense of sharing common perspectives. For people to be described as belonging to a
community, they must be sharing some values, needs, norms, suffering, religion, happiness, and interests together (Andy, 38). Experts have established that such factors have been shared for a long period of time, say centuries.
In a community, there is the aspect of joint actions, where special bonds bring the people together- friendship, families and even working environments (Peter, 49).
In all communities of the world, there exists community spirit, though variable from a region to another (Andy, 51). All communities hold some ideas about themselves, and always identify themselves by them. In all cases, the people have positive notions, they view their community as one with a great future and this always enables them to give great contribution to the community in whatever form (Andy, 55). All persons who identify themselves with a community always sacrifice to it in the welfare.
Another major attitude in people belonging to a community is loyalty (Peter, 80). The persons always have some goodwill for the general good and always abide by it. They have a good expression of optimism, in that they know right behind their minds the community holds good for them. The attitudes are portrayed in the individual behavior, coupled by their unity and therefore contributing to the common good.
In any community however, leadership is very important. All successful communities call for coordination by a person or a team that is unanimously recognized. Such leaders are expected to steer the community ahead in the right direction. They are persons of integrity, lead by example and operate within the set norms or community ethics. For a community to be bound together, it requires proper means of conflict
resolution incase need arises (Andy, 80). Once in a while, the members cross each others’ paths, which is a normal practice. The community leaders come in and solve such misunderstandings so that the people live in harmony.
References
Peter, B. Community: The Structure of Belonging: San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, Inc., 2008
Andy, S. Creating Community: Five Keys to Building a Small Group Culture. USA: Multnomah Publishers, 2004
Sunday, February 7, 2010
The Institute for the Study of Civic Values
Although established in Philadelphia I believe this Institute would be very benefical to all communities throughout the United States. This institute is invovled in many projects at one time and at this time in the United States economy in relation to the job market, I feel their PHILLY PROGRAM could be adopted in other states to help better prepare their unskilled workers and get them ready to enter the work force. See what makes this program work:
PhillyCorps is a project of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values that involves placing public assistance recipients in community service internships throughout Philadelphia linked to their current skills and long-range career goals. PhillyCorps helps people on welfare gain work experience now within the City's neighborhoods that strengthens their ability to secure full-time employment and meet long-range career goals in the future.
The Institute has been developing this program over a 10 year period. In 2002, we established an ongoing partnership with Arbor, E&T, that enables us to concentrate on building a citywide network of community service jobs, while Arbor handles case management, wraparound services, and job development. In our most recent program year in partnership with Arbor, 62% of the participants found unsubsidized jobs paying at least $7.00/hour. The wraparound services that Arbor, E&T provides enhances significantly the recipients' chances of finding good paying jobs consistent with their long-term goals.
How does PhillyCorps differ from workfare?
Evaluators of workfare programs report that participants often fail to show up for work and that their jobs often provide no skills training that can help them secure full time employment. PhillyCorps has overcome all of these obstacles. By concentrating on quality placement, case management, and on-the-job skills and work habits training, we have been able succeed where other programs have failed.
PhillyCorps provides:
Careful evaluation and placement. Each participant is evaluated for skills and aspirations. All agencies in our community service network commit to providing on-the-job training and considering interns for paid positions if available. We carefully match intern to placement slot.
Support for agencies and interns to ensure that the internship experience is a success. Case managers work with both site supervisors and interns to ensure that participants fulfill community service activities and work in positions which maximize their skills and interests.
Job readiness and career preparation training. Unlike standard job readiness models, PhillyCorps provides on-the-job training in office skills, including the use of computer software and the Internet, along with help in typing and data entry. We work with the Center for Literacy to provide workplace literacy training for interns who require this additional support.
Regional Job Development. PhillyCorps benefits from the Job Development services of Arbor, E&T
Links to formal social service networks referrals to government and private programs in order reduce barriers to long-term self-sufficiency. PhillyCorps stresses lifelong learning by helping participants develop short and long range goals, and supporting them in juggling work, family and training
A strong and qualified workforce makes for a better and stronger community.
PhillyCorps is a project of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values that involves placing public assistance recipients in community service internships throughout Philadelphia linked to their current skills and long-range career goals. PhillyCorps helps people on welfare gain work experience now within the City's neighborhoods that strengthens their ability to secure full-time employment and meet long-range career goals in the future.
The Institute has been developing this program over a 10 year period. In 2002, we established an ongoing partnership with Arbor, E&T, that enables us to concentrate on building a citywide network of community service jobs, while Arbor handles case management, wraparound services, and job development. In our most recent program year in partnership with Arbor, 62% of the participants found unsubsidized jobs paying at least $7.00/hour. The wraparound services that Arbor, E&T provides enhances significantly the recipients' chances of finding good paying jobs consistent with their long-term goals.
How does PhillyCorps differ from workfare?
Evaluators of workfare programs report that participants often fail to show up for work and that their jobs often provide no skills training that can help them secure full time employment. PhillyCorps has overcome all of these obstacles. By concentrating on quality placement, case management, and on-the-job skills and work habits training, we have been able succeed where other programs have failed.
PhillyCorps provides:
Careful evaluation and placement. Each participant is evaluated for skills and aspirations. All agencies in our community service network commit to providing on-the-job training and considering interns for paid positions if available. We carefully match intern to placement slot.
Support for agencies and interns to ensure that the internship experience is a success. Case managers work with both site supervisors and interns to ensure that participants fulfill community service activities and work in positions which maximize their skills and interests.
Job readiness and career preparation training. Unlike standard job readiness models, PhillyCorps provides on-the-job training in office skills, including the use of computer software and the Internet, along with help in typing and data entry. We work with the Center for Literacy to provide workplace literacy training for interns who require this additional support.
Regional Job Development. PhillyCorps benefits from the Job Development services of Arbor, E&T
Links to formal social service networks referrals to government and private programs in order reduce barriers to long-term self-sufficiency. PhillyCorps stresses lifelong learning by helping participants develop short and long range goals, and supporting them in juggling work, family and training
A strong and qualified workforce makes for a better and stronger community.
An overview of my community
Community Profile- Mahwah, NJ
This is a community profile of Mahwah, New Jersey. The profile highlights on the name of the community, its geographical location, community neighborhood and community demographics. Information about this community is retrieved from reputable sources including publications and relevant websites.
Mahwah is the largest township community in Bergen County within New York metro region occupying 25.93 square miles. Mahwah got its name from the beauty of the surroundings. The name means beautiful green meeting point (Bischoff and Kahn, 1979). This township which is on latitude 41.088 N and longitude -74.144 W is endowed with beautiful mountains, gently slanting hills and magnificent slopes in a nice and appealing innate environment. The built environment is equally appealing with the streets of Mahwah being wide and lined with trees. It has attractive homes and urban developments an indicator of the deliberate superb planning by the local planning. This township neighbors Allendale, Oakland, Saddle River, Franklin Lakes, Ramsey, Ridgewood, Waldwick, Glen Rock and Midland Park townships (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
According to Bischoff and Kahn (1979), the original inhabitants of Mahwah were the Indians. This has changed gradually with more diverse people settling in the township. The population of Mahwah consists of Italians, the Irish, Germans, Polish, English, and Russian, Black Americans and Dutch inhabitants. Italians are the majority and have outnumbered the original Indians. The population of Mahwah in the 2000 census was 24, 062 (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
Suitability of Mahwah in hosting a couple of recreational events is unrivalled. It is the largest township in Bergen County and coupled with an enabling environment hosts a plethora of sporting activities notably golf. Mahwah is home for an excellent private 18-hole championship golf course with a country club. It also has a spectacular county golf course in a sprawling green environment. A large section of land has been set aside by the Bergen County Park commission for sporting activities like horseback riding, mountaineering, camping, and archery, golfing and skiing. In Mahwah there is also the Darlington County Park which is dedicated to recreational activities like swimming, boating, fishing, and long tennis. There are also community baseball fields, tennis courts, and several playgrounds in Mahwah which attests to a well-planned frivolous plan (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
There are five elementary schools in Mahwah: Betsy Ross School; George Washington; Lenape Meadows; Kilmer School and Ramapo Ridge Middle School. It also has Mahwah High School and a beautiful contemporary college known as Ramapo College. Transport and communication is well taken care of with excellent commuting channels. One is easily connected to New York from this township through a commuter train or by several bus routes (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
Mahwah is a good community which is habitable. The host of sporting activities makes it popular with tourists. Mahwah is a must see not only for sports fans but also anyone who is fascinated by mountainous green scenery.
References
Bischoff H. and Kahn M. (1979). From pioneer settlement to suburb: a history of Mahwah, New Jersey, 1700-1976. London, UK: A.S. Barnes
Lurie M. and Mappen M. (2004). Encyclopedia of New Jersey. Rutgers University Press. New Brunswick, New Jersey
This is a community profile of Mahwah, New Jersey. The profile highlights on the name of the community, its geographical location, community neighborhood and community demographics. Information about this community is retrieved from reputable sources including publications and relevant websites.
Mahwah is the largest township community in Bergen County within New York metro region occupying 25.93 square miles. Mahwah got its name from the beauty of the surroundings. The name means beautiful green meeting point (Bischoff and Kahn, 1979). This township which is on latitude 41.088 N and longitude -74.144 W is endowed with beautiful mountains, gently slanting hills and magnificent slopes in a nice and appealing innate environment. The built environment is equally appealing with the streets of Mahwah being wide and lined with trees. It has attractive homes and urban developments an indicator of the deliberate superb planning by the local planning. This township neighbors Allendale, Oakland, Saddle River, Franklin Lakes, Ramsey, Ridgewood, Waldwick, Glen Rock and Midland Park townships (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
According to Bischoff and Kahn (1979), the original inhabitants of Mahwah were the Indians. This has changed gradually with more diverse people settling in the township. The population of Mahwah consists of Italians, the Irish, Germans, Polish, English, and Russian, Black Americans and Dutch inhabitants. Italians are the majority and have outnumbered the original Indians. The population of Mahwah in the 2000 census was 24, 062 (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
Suitability of Mahwah in hosting a couple of recreational events is unrivalled. It is the largest township in Bergen County and coupled with an enabling environment hosts a plethora of sporting activities notably golf. Mahwah is home for an excellent private 18-hole championship golf course with a country club. It also has a spectacular county golf course in a sprawling green environment. A large section of land has been set aside by the Bergen County Park commission for sporting activities like horseback riding, mountaineering, camping, and archery, golfing and skiing. In Mahwah there is also the Darlington County Park which is dedicated to recreational activities like swimming, boating, fishing, and long tennis. There are also community baseball fields, tennis courts, and several playgrounds in Mahwah which attests to a well-planned frivolous plan (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
There are five elementary schools in Mahwah: Betsy Ross School; George Washington; Lenape Meadows; Kilmer School and Ramapo Ridge Middle School. It also has Mahwah High School and a beautiful contemporary college known as Ramapo College. Transport and communication is well taken care of with excellent commuting channels. One is easily connected to New York from this township through a commuter train or by several bus routes (Lurie and Mappen, 2004).
Mahwah is a good community which is habitable. The host of sporting activities makes it popular with tourists. Mahwah is a must see not only for sports fans but also anyone who is fascinated by mountainous green scenery.
References
Bischoff H. and Kahn M. (1979). From pioneer settlement to suburb: a history of Mahwah, New Jersey, 1700-1976. London, UK: A.S. Barnes
Lurie M. and Mappen M. (2004). Encyclopedia of New Jersey. Rutgers University Press. New Brunswick, New Jersey
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
