. . .
kia orana, greetings.
A few media-type questions below.
But first, some background.
Had a little brainflash just now, a few moments ago. Relating all this web2, gov2, you2 stuff to areas of my news agency interest, corruption and transparency.
"Why not transparency2 ?"
So I did a quick google. Nothing. Bowing to accepted terminology I typed :
"Transparency 2.0"
You know, with the quotes.
Magic. Vastly encouraged to find a wealth of material online already.
Just for laughs, I then decided to confine my search to New Zealand.
A ready sneer died on my lips when the one, single link to pop up was of course, this page.
At State Services.
State services? I wondered. Is this New Zealand? Or some weird stray from America? Scroll up. Nah. A blog. At the New Zealand State Services Commission. I gawped.
On their official web site!
All the way back from 30 April 2009!!
And ... comments.
Eight of them.
Hearty congratulations to the SSC for providing national leadership on something New Zealand needs to catch up on, like, really quickly.
Lack of transparency across the board, despite freedom of information legislation, traverses beyond legal borders into outright corruption.
The fact that a multi-billion construction scandal can be successfully portrayed as a common cold without a single prosecution strongly suggests systemic failure throughout the executive, if not legislature.
Leaky House Syndrome, but one example.
Another.
"New" Zealand does not deserve it's place at the top of the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. A little bit of digging raises questions about hundreds of millions here, a few billions there.
Pretty soon, you're talking real money.
And lives.
A colleague, giving me therapy for burn-out, blurted out how, over the years, there have been at least half a dozen deaths among journalists, freelancers and information activists.
Unexplained. Sudden. A disappearance, or two.
Here, in New Zealand.
Corruption of a deep, ugly, kind, if even half the not-reported rumours are true.
The challenge for the SSC is to not to avoid the minefield, but to lay one.
Question is, what next?
Having enabled a benchmark via this blog post, what is the SSC doing about it?
What progress can we expect by the 12 month mark from this blog post, and others in the same vein from the author?
As an independent news agency, we'll be marking the 12 month anniversary with reporting, on what's been done towards continuing the Laurence Millar legacy so warmly praised above.
More of a challenge, really.
Rationale for such a challenge is in itself part of the transparency2 paradigm shift. For example, this agency has already posted a copy of this comment on its own blog site. Date stamped, the post will be a useful benchmark against time of response from the commission.
Bit of a chicken or egg process but done it a few times now.
Type this up first. Post it on my agency inhouse transparency blog. Copy the link onto this blog post, this page, this comment box.
Click "Post Comment".
Advantage for the commission is that they can respond in kind, and in full, instantly, by leaving comment on the blog.
No journalistic gatekeeping.
Even better, the comments are automatically linked to my page on Facebook and a global network of friends and associates as well as colleagues in the journalism community worldwide.
Or the commission can issue a press release via Scoop, which is automatically picked up by news aggregators like Google News, just like I'll do to publicise questions around the issue of transparency 2.0.
Probably relates in some way to gov 3.0 concepts.
Anyway, what I probably wouldn't say face to face is this kind of editorial comment:
"What the commission cannot do is continue to ignore criticisms from a broad range of CSO, civil society organisations that there are deeply shameful abnegations of responsibility within its main area of competency, i.e. good governance."
I'd pose it as a question instead.
"How does the Commission respond to criticism from civil society organisations that there are shameful, even deeply shameful abnegations of responsibility within the commission's main areas of competency, such as good governance?"
"You know, preventing corruption and promoting governance. Stuff."
Like what?
The commission may well ask.
Well, like like the rainbow coalition of CSOs who mounted an extensive campaign named "Don't corrupt aid?" alleging a complete break down in due process with the Murray McCully-inspired dismantling of NZAID. Three decades of aid harmonisation within global UN and other systems, tossed out the window.
For example ...of the criticism.
You understand.
Excuse the rather chatty style, but that in itself is part of transparency 2.0. It's how I'd give background over the phone, or face2face, to use that hip, happening web2 style.
As prelude to questions, in other words, like the ones above.
Sending questions this way gives readers an insight into how the journalistic process works, whether it's fair. Kinda thing.
Don't worry, transparency 2.0 has its limits.
Anything marked news from this news agency will, of course, adhere to old-school, journalism 1.0 ethics.
But, for now, Transparency. 2.0.
Or maybe it's transparency 3.0 ?
Whatever. This agency is amalgamating these approaches through what we are promoting as TTT, Total Transparency Tools. An element of TTT is a transparency 2.0 version of the infamously positive curriculum vitae.
It's called curriculum veritas.
Brainflash over. Over to you guys and gals.
kia manuia,
jason brown
editor
avaiki nius agency
est. 1999 rarotonga
. . .
avaiki nius agency | news reviews since 1999
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query transparency. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query transparency. Sort by date Show all posts
draft profiles for pacific freedom forum
. . .
EDITORIAL NOTE
Layout on this page is ugly-as.
Draft profiles are presented anyhow for quick industry and public overview.
Ugrading to proper links on niusonline - with updates and corrections - enables better feedback from people interested in media centrality and capacity.
. . .
membership
pacific freedom forum
wednesday 20 august 2008
more bookmarks, links, etc to come
1 aotearoa
1 american samoa
1 kiribati
1 hawaii
1 samoa
1 vanuatu
2 fiji
2 solomon islands
4 australia
5 cook islands
13 papua new guinea
1 group email
1 cc email (2 email, 1 person)
- monica miller, chair
- susuve laumaea, chair
- lisa williams-lahari, founder
- alfred sasako, manager
- jason brown, manager
- john anderson, member
- linda uan, member
- malio sio, member
- mark hayes, dr, manager
- ulamila wragg, manager
- titi gabi, manager
- yehiura hriehwazi, manager
. . .
Forum transparency
membership, public vs. private
12 public members 20 private members
member transparency = 37 %
management, public vs. private
9 public managers 5 private managers
manager transparency = 64 %
. . .
Forum membership update
The Pacific Freedom Forum now has 32 members, 15 of them signing within the first 24 hours.Well, only 14, really, because in the rush PFF forgot to add Susuve Laumaea to the Forum email list.
A bit puzzling for Lauaea, considering the forum had asked him to co-chair the forum and act as a spokesperson with Monica Miller. It only took a few days for a PFF manager to get suspicious as to why the co-chair was so quiet.
. . .
Emerging transparency
From an industry that calls continually for transparency, members of the media are a shy bunch - just 35 % - one out of three - opting to publicly declare their support for the Pacific Freedom Forum.
An encouraging sign to emerge is a strong commitment towards transparency from founding forum managers, nine of 14 managers opting to go public - about two thirds.
At first glance - or thin slice as the jargon has it - the public face of freedoms seems a fair cross-section of islands media. There is a student, senior manager, news director, random freelancers, media volunteers, company directors, an academic and an aspiring politician, one with extensive experience on both sides of hourly deadlines.
Background
In one short sentence, the Pacific Freedom Forum is an advocacy space for urgent issues facing freedoms of speech.
PFF is the latest acronym to leap into the alphabet stew of regional institutions, a fresh, young pea, bobbing around bravely among big, meaty NGOs, CSOs, NSAs, dodging a PING, a PANG, and a PIANGO of jargon-laden social justice.
Actually, one acronym is completely made up, presenting a golden opportunity for more vowel mash-ups.
. . .
Formal motion
After a few days internal debate over chicken-or-egg priorities, PFF noticed a media query asking for more details about members. This prompted a speedy motion, formally mooted, that:
"That all members of the Pacific Freedom Forum agree that all current membership details i.e. name, current positions, and country of residence be publicly and permanently disclosed, with agreement to this transparency being a pre-condition of any future membership application."
One private manager suggested that members could put their names to each motion as they saw fit – building precedence on a case-by-case basis.
. . .
Membership transparency
An original 13 members of the Pacific Freedom Forum, joining within 24 hours, have all been given manager status by the forum founder.
Of those 14, nine have chosen to join a public list following formal motion to require public disclosure of membership.
Of the remaining five, private, managers, one points out that some PFF members have valid cause for wanting to stay anonymous. Issues like job loss, or even harassment by military thugs sounds like valid cause for private membership.
. . .
Generally accepted practice
Private sources can give valuable insight and feedback. This idea is so fundamental to journalism that even junior journos would go, “yeah – duh.” Given that it is generally accepted practice on the frontlines of journalism, it could be argued that similar synergies apply back among the support troops. In short, there is journalistic precedence for the approach apparently supported by most PFF members and managers.. . .
Public member list
name: monica miller
positions: editor, co-chair
organisations: radio, pacific freedom forum
country: Samoas
contributor:
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum
. . .
name: susuve laumaea
positions: chair
organisations: pacific freedom forum,
country: papua new guinea
contributor:
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum,
. . .
name: lisa williams-lahari
positions: founder
organisations: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum
country: cook islands,
contributor: islands business international
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum,
. . .
name: titi gabi
positions:
organisations: papua new guinea media council ??,
country: papua new guinea
contributor:
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum manager
. . .
name: ulamila wragg
public profile: google
positions: chief reporter
organisations: cook islands news
contributor: islands business international
member: interim cook islands journalists association, pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum manager
. . .
name: alfred sasako
positions:
organisations:
status: ngos, government
country: solomon islands
contributor:
member: media association solomon islands MASI, pacific islands journalism online PIJO, pacific freedom forum, PFF.
. . .
name: jason brown
positions: editor, acting secretary, interim secretary
organisations: avaiki news agency, pacific islands media association, cook islands journalists association, interim.
status: ngos
country: avaiki, cook islands
contributor: islands business international, pacific media watch, jpk update
member: pacific islands news association PINA (pending response), pacific islands media association, pacific islands journalism online PIJO, pacific freedom forum PFF manager.
. . .
name: linda uan
positions: producer, manager
organisations: nei tabera ni kai video
status: ngo
country: kiribati
contributor:
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum
. . .
name: john anderson
positions: director, trainer
organisations: nei tabera ni kai video
status: ngo
country: kiribati
contributor:
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum
. . .
name: mark hayes, dr
positions: journalism lecturer
organisations: university of queensland
status: academic
country: australia
contributor:
member: pacific islands journalism online, pacific freedom forum, manager
. . .
INFORMAL | COMMENTS
Response to the formal motion was affirmative from 12 out of 32 members, well under half, not enough to carry the motion if simple majority were called.
However, a majority of managers, 10 out of 14, voted for public disclosure of their background details, in the interests of transparency, accountability and credibility.
As suggested by a private manager, the forum appears to have informally adopted the idea of putting their name to motions on a case-by-case basis, usually accompanied by the usual cautions, commentary and crack-ups, as follows.
. . .
“I am OK if it is just names, job title and country. No to phone numbers, email, spouse, children, age etc, etc!!!!!”
. . .
Name, job title,country will suffice thanks. With our slow internet we're a tad confused as to the consensus about revealing who we are.
Events have probably shot past us at a great rate, but in case it hasn't, we support Name, Who we are, Where we are, What we do & title. No to email & telephone - enough unwelcome stuff comes from those sources.
Loved the stuff - would you please let us Luddites know what to do.
. . .
“I posted the news release and forum statement on my blog yesterday. Hopefully my former colleagues in Samoa will read and take note of..or have already on other news sites.. also for the PI student journalists still in training here in NZ who frequent our blog spots. The news release and statement is just the sort of collective voice from the more senior/ experienced journalists in the region who worked on it that inspires newcomers in the field. “
. . .
“Name, country, organization … all good.”
. . .
“I agree with … the suggestions put forward.”
. . .
“Motion seconded by me and I consent to the letter, intent and spirit of the motion.
“All those in favor say "Aye" !
. . .
“You can't eat your cake and keep it too. You're either in or you're not. It's an exercise in freedom. No one is holding a big stick over your head to join or be active. If looking after your little quiet comfort zone quietly is more important to your quiet self than a collective advocacy to right the wrongs for the larger collective benefit, then just remain a passive spectator.”
. . .
“I’m voting with both hands and feet...Full transparency.”
. . .
“Great passion from the co-chair!!”
. . .
“Hmmmmmm..very transparent”
. . .
“Just make sure you're not using all four at the same time. You'll have no legs to stand on otherwise.”
. . .
“Hey can you write shorter than this, I mean I wanna read but by the time I finish reading and absorbing everything in this email I would have again missed my deadlines, my babies screaming for their next feed and the pigs from my uncle next door have dug into all my flower beds!!!!
. . .
disappointment over lack of aid transparency
NEWS
Disappointment from the latest round of talks over the future of aid, held last week in Accra, Africa:
"The big step forward at the Accra Forum was the focus on transparency both in the run-up and during conference deliberations,' said Craig Fagan, a Senior Policy Coordinator for TI. 'Unfortunately, though, this did not translate into the firm, specific and time-bound commitments on accountability, transparency and fighting corruption, needed to make aid more effective.' Figures show that in Africa alone, more than US $148 billion (€102 billion) is lost annually to corruption. Total global official aid flows in 2007 amounted to US $104 billion (€72 billion)."Transparency International, itself, is of course on record at this agency with nearly a dozen unanswered questions about the way it writes country reports.
LINKS
Transparency International news release
avaiki stories on Transparency International
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)