Each of our editorially controlled channels has an embed page were you can grab a Open-source code to place them on your website.

http://visionon.tv/web/headmix/embed

http://visionon.tv/web/grassroots/embed

http://visionon.tv/web/plugandplay/embed

http://visionon.tv/web/globalviews/embed

http://visionon.tv/web/frendlyfire/embed

Dive in and have a go on your site, and give us some feedback about how it goes (we know the are issues with Wordpress sites)

To embed this: 
<p> <iframe frameborder="no" height="220" scrolling="no" src="http://visionon.tv/widget/web/guest/facebook/-/59_INSTANCE_Ray0" width="640"></iframe></p>

War: Inquiry into Tony Blair and the British government’s involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq

The future of the radical web is between a standards based approach and a make it up from scratch based approach. And the make it up from scratch based approach is by far the strongest path in activist programming.

A standards based approach would be something like this http://informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/social_networking_private_platforms/231500441/opensocial-20-spec-stresses-social-media-interoperability

A make it up your self based approach would be like this http://piratenpad.de/hIyt3iFDp9

Obviously if we are building a sustainable alternative a standards based approach is more helpful. This is one of the resions why activist based tech projects are largely hopeless at achieving social change.

Scenes

* street in Dalston, filled with normal people, one hipster, 2 hipsters, half hipsters, then all hipsters

* Café (Otto) camera tracks, line of hipsters to the owner of the café serving Coffey – behind him a bored with organic, vegetarian, and Vegan (crossed out/sold out) burgers in stock.

* Montage different tables of happy hipsters eating burgers, the owner in the background with a questioner.

* Cut to owner asks questions to young pretty hipster couple “Q. something hipster, @ vegetarian or vegan”, hipster girl answers vegan. The owner is interested and asks them to the kitchen to see how the burgers are made.

* kitchen – have to right this bit?

* the owner standing by a rubbish bin, if you look closely in the bin are the cloths of the hipster bot and girl, CUT he washes his handing in a sink and they run red. He walks out of the kitchen smiling. FADE – Next day.

* SHOT morning clean up, glasses washing, righting up on the noticeboard “fresh in vegan burgers”

* CUT Kitchen chopping up the body, CUT to everybody eating

* Reverse opening shot, street full of hipsters, half full, 2 hipsters, one hipster, only normal people.

* Café closed sign, owners shuts door, takes off his hipster glasses and crushes them under foot, walks off – the street is empty.

Up in the water tower (DRAFT)

I arrived in genoa a few days before the demonstrations were due to start to help setup the indymedia center. We travelled in a tiny campa van with my frend marion from Munic. The border coursed no problem - the border gaurd asked us why we were going to Italia and we sead we were holidaying on the cost, with a little knowing look on both sides. Arriving in Genoa the police presents was hevey, the convergences center was being setup down at the beach - Just a hundred yarded away the was a huge police buld up at the stadeam. After wondering around a while, we campt the night parked out of sight beside one of the big markeys of the harf finished convergences center in the morning meeting up with other groups we made our way to the GSF and IMC organising building the Deaz school.

The IMC

We found a place to stay at the IMC up at the head of the stares on the roof which was out of the way, looked around. The video room was full of techy gear but non of it seamed to be available for public use. The centre was well equipped with computers suppled by the city all networked together. The techy crew had oversly put a lot of work into the setep. Linex on all the computers with no applications and no system of support to help peopul make the transition to this “non-standard” operating system – a powerful geuster of what is possible but practical useless for what the PC’s were for. A re-accruing theme in the tec-jerno divide.

The Video room was a bit of a fiasco a lot of non-configured priveit computing kit – most of it password protected taking up the majority of the space. The was no shared resources and it seamed non of the kit worked in a familiar standard way. An ego wank space with little organised IMC ethos.

Two Pc’s were “requisitioned” from other rooms and MS Windows was installed (as there is no functioning linix video editing software. At one of the first meetings money was put aside to upgrade one of these computers to be a DV editing system with a new hardrive and Firewire card. The other we installed an analogue card B- from cannalB brought along – so we had two shared editing systems. The second of these masions created the bulk of the video that was uploaded from the IMC center during the summit – the DV computer broke down on the second day and didn’t work agen.

Me and Marion headed down to the street to make the first report at the convergences centre. It wasn’t long before we were stopped and detained by a group of undercover police man while doing a pices to camera outside the main police accommodation stadium with happened to be right next to the convergences centre. We were held for a few hours while more and more undercover policeman arrived until the was 10 or 12 and two cars around us. They asked me for the tape in the camera I refused, took down all our details and checked our passports away – it become a bit nerve racking… I secreadly filmed some of the secret policeman. Interestingly we were surprised to see one of them two more times undercover at the counter-summit and outside the IMC centre before the raid.

Driveing round the streets trying to film the red zone barrier going up… getting stopped and detained twice. For an hour the first time and 3-4 hours the second, arguing with the police and attempting to exercise normal civil rights proved fruitless this was the first nagging Orwellion feeling that was reinforced over the week of demonstrating. The police were a state in them selves and the was obversly no respect for the role of law in there actions. Fear was starting to stalk the streets encircling the meeting of the cabal of world power.

The first day on the streets, the migrants march.

The righertr

The raid on the IMC. after the shooting the tension was rising, paranoia about police represhern. People began to leave the indymedia center, people began to leave Genoa. The was much discussion of what to do and no firm concesensus. Meany people made the disishern to leave independently intill the numbers had harfed as the night wore on reports of police movements.

At midnight the were shouts of the police are coming. I looked out the window but couldent see any thing… people started to run around grabbing stuff and barricading doors… I run to find Marion and told her about the hiding place on the roof I had checked out when we arrived. She grabbed the tapes and equipment and headed off.

Looking out the side window I could not see any police around the front door so I shouted back to the people blockading the door… trying to carm the situation.

I went up to the roof to film the carebonery braking into the building next door a van smashing threw the front gate police man braking the windows with chares smashing down the doors with tables they find in the court yard. Worried for my safety and the video I was recording after a few minits I decided to head back down stairs to see if the police were coming into the IMC as well.

At the IMC things carmed down for a bit are the police invading this building or not? I decided to go down stairs and check… after two flights turning a corner I came face to face with a careabener policeman dressed in full body armour with his truction drawn panting his way up the stairwell. At this I turned and flew up two flights shouting, “they are in the building” past the barricaded door to the IMC and up to the roof. Dodging the spotlight from the circling helicopter I headed over to the window of the water tower and lowed myself in whispering “Marion its me” no answer. Creeping there the darkness with the only light being from the IR beam of my camera I made my way down threw the corridor of water tanks whispering “Marion are you there” starting to panic that she was not. This small and frightend voice came back “tern the light off”. She was hiding behind the space behind the last water tank.

We waited. She had brought a bottle of water and supplies.

We talked about what we would do if when the police came, would they come in and search… would they through tear gas… would they smash our equipment and brake our bones.. these all seamed very real.

The helicopter secaled its spotlight lighting up the window of the water tower. Nosease of movent out side the police searching the roof. We kept very quiet and still.

We were there for 3-4 hours the was screaming from the street bellow and building cry’s of assassina in the distances… we only came out after the helicopter had left to find…

Survivors wondering the roof top in a daze… I interved two English girls who had been in the IMC during the raid. The when down stairs to survey the damage. Doors smashed open computer dismembered there hard drives ripped out, monitors smashed. Across the street was much worse waiting… blood covered the floor congealing into pudals and splayed up walls. Trails lead into huddled corners cloths lay around in disarray, personal belongings covered the floor specked here and there by blood stains. Desalt dazed people were searching through the piles reporters stood in clumps. The trail of blood lead up the stairs bits of skin and clumps of heir stuck to the walls falling the trail of broken doors and hasty barackeds looking in cobereds and under desks each place some one could have his the was blood and broken skin the bashing of heads agens walls the smiring of blood stained hands – the was a smell in the building. The Craebanery had left there mark.

Thinking were we come from... mainstream bohiminasm, hippy drop-out culture, Greenham, CND, vagabond, labour party, student, squatting culture, protest camp culture, DIY community group organising, undercurrents, internet utopian's, Anti-GM direct action, coupuratewatch, risingtide, indymedia, summit hoping, anti-war direct action, mainstream alt-tv, rescuing/ running a community centre, European social forum/SWP, visionontv, climatecamp, Rebelus Media Confunce, occupation movement...

This is from 07/03/2005

You can go on this journey and find these things out thus creating a possibility or you can push them under the surfaces, smother or bash them every time they spring or seep out of our subcultures.

Childishness and the lack of any group memory

In activist cercals it is thought a good thing to constantly re-invent the wheel… it’s a symbol of belonging – not rocking the bout.

* Tribalism – it symbols and sent markings - cercals and there disappearing spirals

* Ridged thought – political correctness and it hidden fidgety - re-creating the Soviet Union

* Stupid individualism

What do all these things mean?

Stupid individualism – is all bound up in the smallness of the ego that capitalism makes in us all. Me, me, me is a strong priority even in our most enlightened people.

Re-creating the Soviet Union – is an excellent way of describing the rigidity of much “thought” and clocking of real process. Just as the Soviet Union had a modeal constitution on paper, but acted in a very different way, activist are continually re-righting and re-righting paper utopias and then, actively working under completely different ways – this has been a continues problem for outreach. The paper ways fall over as they are never enacted by the majority of people. And the hidden ways though often surprising affective at getting things done are very disempowering beyond the small cleack at the center. If we keep re-creating the “soviet union”, unconsciously certainly, nothing can be achieved by this… they had the secret polices and a highly authoritarian polices state to make there paper constitution in to a big illusion and there hidden workings into an affective administration… we just have a paper illusion that confuses and a hidden minority who burn out and move on.

Tribalism ???

This is a old draft from the early ideas stage of visionontv

Short proposal

Imagine a TV channel where anyone can put anything in and take anything out, which streemed personalised channel just for you. To achieve this we can use the internet to make jump from current TV to future TV by providing the simulation of a traditional streaming channel personalised to the viewer, while at the same time opening up the interactive possibilities intrinsic to the mediam (and the age).

A global TV channel, starting small with the current technology and skills, in stages moving into an open universal global media outlet. The content can be freely added by anyone, from more conventional channels or archives to new community or low-budget specials. Content can consist of local issues on council flower beds to the latest Hollywood blockbusters. The e-comers model will mean that all content whoched will reseve a revenuw.

Undercurrents in the Mainstream

The Trojan Horse Application

A Universal TV Channel

A proposal for a world-wide workers co-operative approach to New Media

By Hamish Campbell

We are moving into a cybernetic age, we rely more and more on computers in our everyday life, the mainstream of this is a dulling social control by faceless corporations. However, many people are attempting to use technology as an extension, a facilitating of human potential. Imagine a TV channel where anyone can put anything in and take anything out. Imagine a personalised channel just for you. To achieve this we can use the internet to make jump from current TV to future TV by providing the simulation of a traditional streaming channel, personalised to the viewer, while opening up the interactive possibilities intrinsic to the internet. That is carry a profile of people's interests and work at stretching that profile, just challenging them enough - to widen their tastes, to give them the opportunity to follow different streams.

The project is similar to the interactive book in Neil Stevenson's novel "The diamond age", "A young lady's primer". Which by interactive story telling instills confidence in the readers own wearth and influence. In this, it has an ideological path - the pursuit of freedom and justice. Our art and craft as a TV channel is to make that path visible and accessible to a wider range of people. Firstly to inform, secondly to spark off the interest necessary to leave the bland confurt of the mainstream, to follow more humane secondary streams.

The project sets out to make real the liberal ideology that our societies applaud. It is an attempt at "concrete-utopia", the transmission of the best within our society as it stands, rather than the more normal, problematic, radical approach of overthrowing the status quo to create the new.

Thus the channel inbody’s the mainstreem liberal ideals of:

• Individual liberty

• Equality of opportunity

• A mixed economy

• The green, world approach and local approach.

   

   

  How this will work with broadband Internet TV

   

  Profiling

   

  In the mainstream the mantra of who, what, where is not new, though with interactive consumption it is taking on a new importance. Profiling is big on the NET, everyone is after personal information to "personalise" the alienation of blind consumption. Looking into this can of rotting worms can we find anything worth composting to enrich our garden?

   

  Proposal for a self-directed TV channel.

   

  A global TV channel, starting small with the current technology and skills, in stages moving into an open universal global media outlet. The experience for individuals is that each has a channel of there owen, and you can sample others' channels by amalgamating them with your own - you meet someone, and like their outlook... merge their profile into yours. You like a pop band, merge their channel to yours. This will create overlapping virtual community channels.

  In its interactive shape the channel can be made up of tasters, with a list of viewing options, or can be set to play a more traditional no-interactive schedule. Instead of reaching for the TV guide, just look at the options available on your own channel - or any other global mainstream or counterculture channel.

   

  You choose what to whach as any interaction will bring up a new list of content - much like a real-time review engine. The system then "creates" a channel for you [these will be made up of basic templates*]

   

  * The templates will be baced on traditional TV scheduling the differences will lie in the content. An example would be the BBC 1 schedule. News and life styeal for breakfast, daytime soups, B films, early evening???? Local and global, News then mainstream drama and documentaries, music and such. The programs would be a mixture of live streams (news and sport), new productions and seareals mixed with archives. All profiled the majority to your inclananation, with links and a minority of conflicting views. This will be mixed in with a "random" selection of the "best" that others profiles are watching and some deserving editorial "gems".

   

  Your profile will be adjusted in real-time by your choices of program subjects, by your choices of what is in your profile and, finally, you can go into and directly edit your profile.

   

  The content will be freely added by anyone, from more conventional channels or archives to new community or low-budget specials. Content can consist of local issues on council flower beds to the latest Hollywood blockbusters.

   

  The individual or corporation who adds content, fills in a basic profile for the program. When submitted, this is first sent to "reviewers", that is people who have expressed an interest in reviewing content. They then each add to the program's profile and when there has been a large enough consensus the program is dynamically added to the schedule, with the new consensus profile. The reviewing process is open to all. The System is open to content from all over the world.

   

  All the profiling data is dynamic. If you give a program a good rating its whole profile will be merged with your current profile. Trashing a program will reverse this - it will subtract the profile. This process will be elastic in its effect - it will have a moderate immediate effect and a smaller long term effect. Thus if you are a sports addict and for what ever reason you trash three sports programs and chose a comedy program instead, for the rest of that day you will get comedy and "teasers" of other subjects, the next day you will get half comedy and half sport... on the third day you will get the majority of what you watched on the second, and some of any "teasers" you followed. This process works in reverse, with individual viewers' profiles affecting the profile of the programs themselves.

   

  The profiling system will work as a tree, with top levels and side levels branching off. The top levels will be decided by the user's profile, and then dynamically adjusted.

   

  Some profile categories could be:

   

  Fixed: nationality (country/region); language (spoken/subtitles); type (film/documentary/news/sport/commercial, review; subject (searchable key words) etc.

   

  Variable: quality (good - bad), accessibility (easy - difficult), violence (child - adult), erotic (conservative - liberal), ideology (progressive - reactionary) etc.

   

  This approach would be modified for live streams and real-time news features which would work on a system of trust - that is on an registered profile of the organisation - which again will be adjusted by views real-time choices. Self profiling by active intention and passive consumption.

   

  There are also interesting statistical ways of collecting and processing such information, which could be included.

   

   

  User interface

   

  The basic interface idea is simple, a single button that gives you the option of trashing content you are not interested in. Interface options vary in their level of interactivity, encouraging interactive uses rather than leaving the channel on autopilot.

   

  1. Dumb - by trashing programs the user doesn't like and rating those they do.

  2. Basic interaction - by choosing from the cued up list of possible programming that is provided with any user interaction.

  3. "What mood am I in?" Expressed by the web - sliders - the users can express an interest in certain areas by elastically/temporarily changing the sliders on their profile. (dynamically created by their profile, with one or two challenging additions)

  4. Traditional key word searching (with or without the aid of their profile).

  5. Directly changing their profile (this complies with data laws).

   

  Options

   

  1. You can make your own, or organisations' profile public so that other people can watch it and you can watch other's... Undercurrents, football stars, NGO's, Channel 4 etc.

  2. You can "merge" others profiles in to yours, such as an organisation, famous author's or popstars. Which will provide an easy way of getting an interesting personal channel, and seeing the world from different points of view.

  3. You can bookmark TV series and news services, so that they always appear when a new content comes out.

  4. Key words can form part of your profile, such as a city, person or brand.

   

  It is important to realise that any large "outside" change will soon be personalised by your own interactive choices reshaping your profile to represent (and challenge) your point of view. A Universal TV Channel is not about dumming down people, it is about taking away the dull bureaucratic routines needed to choose “quality” and "truth" in our heavily commercialised and consumptive world.

   

  Funding

  Is flexible and from a number of conflicting sources. It is interesting to note that the content providers and viewers can choose which revenue funds their viewing in real-time, and this will also control our revenue flow. In this the project is one of a viewer/producer workers co-operative.

   

  Funding roots

  Advertising

  E-commerce's commissions

  State money (grants/regional funding)

  Sponsorship

  Donations (PBS)

  Pay per view

   

  Advertising is very problematic, but the money has to come from somewhere... we could accept advertising and feed this to people's profiles - for the mainstream this is the goldmine of revenue, and just like goldmines it has the problem of wide spread pollution. The adverts would directly pay to the content providers (video makers) a commission on each viewer with a cut for us as the provider. This is the dream of mad consumptives, though we live in such a world.

   

  Links to commercial sites - both mainstream and counterculture - the balance is decided by people's own profiles. We take the standard Internet commission for referrals and any purchases that these create. It is important to note that adverts are profiled just like programs.

   

  Public service? Government money? If this was possible, we could then pass this onto content providers and take a more respectable running cost commission. A good source of funding.

   

  Donations, the old PBS projects. May work for special interest groups, again we have the opening of taking a small commission in the middle.

   

  It is important that a proportion from each revenue stream is cross subsidised to all viewed work. Thus the mainstream movies advertising would pay for the counterculture response. Creating the liberal (and free market) ideal of "perfect knowledge".

   

• cut for video producer.

• cut for redistribution over whole network.

• small cut for the host server of the video,

• small cut for channel(us).

• small cut for channel's production grants.

Thus we are not only a voluntary distribution network, we also pay for content, bringing a wider and more creative mix of local and global content.

Next Steps

Approach

This is the freeing of human potential, the profiling is not to facilitate people wallowing in their own ghettos. Each channel needs to always carry a wide range of views. For example, if someone's profile was largely shaped by sex and sport, the programming would not only be filled by pornography and golfing, but links and teasers for programs on the effect of pornography and the destruction of wildlife by the building of golf courses. In this example, if the viewer followed one of these links, their profile would react and bring up more options - a small, different window opening into a larger worldview.

Structure

We need a production, editorial and management team. The net, like any "unmoderated free market place", is filled with dross. An editorial level above the reviewers would add a holistic view to the information flow. Human beings are created by their society - if we do not consciously attempt to shape its flow - we are in continuing danger of polluting and despoiling our commons.

C.f.: Gerat Harding, Tragedy of the commons.)

Technology

1. We need to write a database to hold the profiling information, the channels templates, and provide and input page for content.

2. To create the user interface and local web TV application.

3. Sign up content deals with current Internet video hosting sites.

4. Work on the financing and management model.

Time table

This project is now technically feasible, relatively inexpensive to setup as a technological prototype. Marketing would be by rumour and users word of mouth (viral marketing as it is called)

6 months for programming and setup

3 moths testing

3 moths to get up to speed with content and video hosting.

Full launch of mature product in 1 year’s time.

Cost

For a minimal budget setup, in the region of £200,000 for the first year. Have office space in Oxford and access to an experienced development team in London.

Hamish’s history of The European Newsreal

The has been much talk about doing a European wide video newsreal for the last 10 years or so. Undercurrents, which grew out of the UK anti-roads movement was in its latter additions an attempt at covering geographic wider story’s. However it wasn’t till the digital camcorder revolution and the communication revolution of the internet made video documentary work at a grass roots level sustainable.

I was working with undercurrent in Oxford covering demo’s and teaching the actional video activist course at Ruskin collage. The European Newsreal came out of 6 months of funding I wangled, which left me free to …. I had been thinking of doing a European video production/screening network for some time, had raised the issue at a number of European manifestations and alt-gatherings. Had meet many good and committed video makers, B- of CannalB (Berlin) in Genoa had impressed me with her work ethic, Marion from Munich had translated the 9.11 film I had brought back from NY IMC. I visited croater were I meet Iva and Oliver who were making original videos and organising screenings. With such good committed and driven people something should be possible if they could all be connected together and a common spark ignited.

At the time I was supplying short edited news stories for World in Crises a weekly 30 minute report for Freespeach TV in the states. While chatting to Eric by e-mail one day the subject of a European news program came up, FSTV had been running the Indymedia Newsreal for the 6 months at this point. Eric had some development funding which had to be spent before the summer so the European wide news project was pushed into fast gear with the help of Anna Bragga (who was planning a new alt-media magazine) and Paulo we organised the Islip gathering by inviting all the nice people I had meet that summer to Oxford.

The idea was to produces a “Europeanised” version of the American project. Keep it very simple with the minimal of rouls and constraints, build it up slow from the core (and committed) group bring in new people as the project grows. The project was to be firstly very simple with no aimless politicking (the pain of progressive IMC type projects) to consist of a page of structure and a paragraph mission statement. The dynamics of the group and regular face to face meetings would keep the project on the productive path. With this in mind it was decided to make the project affiliated of the IMC rather than a direct IMC project, making its out look much more open to non activist ghetto ideas and techniques. For me it was very important that these simple processes need to be agreed from the very beginning then changed by experiences of producing the half hour video. Being very aware of the problem of all talk and no action from the endless activist dream world of East Oxford.

One of the core ideas for me was that we would use blagabel video CD’s for screening and distribution rather than VHS as this would allow a non-centralised and most importantly robust distribution network. VHS being analogue doesn’t work at all well as a non hieratical distribution medium. Its is difficult and time consuming to copy VHS on a small scale. With latter practical but (blind) desion to use VHS we were committed to uncontrolled DV masters being distributed, unrestrained exploitation of others work being a re-accruing problem and is one of the main sources of paranoia in the activist ghetto that I felt we need to avoid this (or at least mediate it) from the beginning. But with most of the innovations I had in mind they only surfaced latter as people directly experienced the issues. This agen is a damming theme from the ghetto that experiences and innovation is seen as a threaght rahater than encouraged. In the ghetto the is little respect for the hieraceys of knowledge involved in knowledge and craft production, this childish attitude is both a blessing when it challenges the existing power structures and a damnation when it undermines real solid alternatives.

We set up the Islip list as a means of achieving this early consensus so that the gathering itself could be the place were we got to know each other and actually share the practical skills of producing a pilot issue of the project. Very few alt-projects are sustainable, the ones that are sustainable tend to be focused on small and closed cleacks, almost all of the IMC networks embody this. In such projects it is generally a small tightly nit core who do most of the work, surrounded by a shifting periphery.

Islip was a faler at creating such a functional core… it instead instutuanlised a fundamentalist and paranoid muddle which the project is now struggling with. The project dose exist but it suffers from a lack of clarity, dignity and warmth that very much questions its long term sustainability. Perhaps after the meeting in May this might be opened up as the paranoia and megalomania of activism may have died down anufe for a solid, practical and interesting project to grow from the current weed racked ground.

Myself am getting on with a more defined project from the start – European wide video activism traing caravan. Funded and role defined from the beginning.

Hamish Campbell, Oxford 2003

Report on Islip Gathering

June 14^th to 17^th 2002

Introduction

The gathering in Islip attracted an impressive attendance of representatives from a variety of alternative media organisations and independent video activists. Some had travelled from as far afield as Croatia and Germany. Eric Galatas, from the US-based FreespeechTV network, the event's sponsor, had travelled from Colorado.

The days were organised around a series of meetings and workshops, the agendas of which were decided and agreed by the attendees themselves.

Goal-setting

The first item was to establish the goal of the project. Everyone present contributed their thoughts and the outcome was a distillation summed up thus:

Create a video structure (network)

• Enable production and screenings of a regular monthly Newsreal: CDs, video tapes, cable, satellite

• Online co-operative network resource

• Decentralised

• Cafes or local nodes

• Resource sharing

• Global distribution

• Use multiple formats and approaches

• Establish European satellite and cable channel, screening programs 24/7

Which,

• Connects and empowers local and global (virtual) communities and groups

• Distributes existing programs

• Facilitates the creation of new groups and programs

• Enables information (skills, clips, events) exchange

Connected to existing movements, shall bring about positive social change.

Workshops

The group then split up into sub-groups to discuss strategies and problem-solving for three crucial areas:

• Production of a monthly Newsreal (a complilation of segments from around European)

• Distribution systems and publicity

• Organising and fundraising

1. Production of monthly Newsreal

The workshop proposed the production of a monthly Newsreal defined as a compilation of segments of 5 minutes or less each totalling a maximum of half an hour (). Segments should be gathered and edited by a different group in different European countries each month so that workload and ownership of the project is shared. Countries outside the UK to provide English translated versions and all raw versions to go to non-UK countries for translation.

It was proposed that the Newsreal be made available in two formats: moultymedia(VCD) and VHS to accommodate different needs and facilitate wider distribution.

2. Distribution systems and publicity

The workshop proposed a three-stage plan to test and build an effective distribution system.

Stage 1: Test pilot the Newsreal using existing 5 minit segment to creat a news reel to be distributed to the current group. And locally screened. Usfull for fundraseing and explaning what the project is about.

Stage 2: Start posting out info on IMC video lists, Make a second “proper” news reel to be screened to sympathetic local groups. Assess feedback. Build a database of contacts of sympathetic groups and other interested parties who may be new to the concept of alternative media and conduct a second round of pilot screenings. Assess feedback and make any recommended changes to Newsreal. Assess and deal with any issues arising from production system. Make the project part of the IMC network – ie. Get it on the video IMC page.

Stage 3: the big lornch has to come after lydon as the main contacts will come from lydon…International launch of Newsreal. Proposed to coincide with the PGA (People's Global Action) conference in Leiden, Netherlands and the World Summit??? at the end of August screenings to take place in Leiden, other key European cities and possibly the US. Big publicity drive incorporating stunts and liaison with sympathetic journalists, aiming for national (as well as local) coverage in the mainstream media of all participating countries. Produce flyers and posters to advertise screenings locally. Post up info on Indymedia website.

3. Organisation and fundraising

The workshop proposed that participating organisations co-ordinate the production of Newsreal with independents sending their segments to the relevant group for that month. Each group should work on it for two or 3 months so they can get up to speed. Undercurrents can do the produces the first two pilots then I would sergest Cannal B produces the lornch issues and possebaly then the corations… its important that groups doing the production have a history of producing and segments (would argue that they should have produced 2 or 3 Newsreel segments before they take on responsabilerty for producing the news reel.

It was recognised that a large amount of translations would be required and that money should be sought for this.

Money to be raised by:

• applying for grants (not-for-profit status of the project to be established beforehand)

• profits from sale of Newsreal at screenings, through universities (People and Planet to distribute), festivals and other outlets

• income from sale of Newsreal to FreespeechTV for monthly screenings and sales to mainstream media in European countries

• we need to think about - sponsorship from ethical companies

Who are we and what is our purpose?

Participants agreed that we need to be able to define who we are and what our purpose is for those who may wish to get involved and for fundraising purposes. A number of definitions were proposed and this is still an area to be agreed on.

What happens next

• Pilot Newsreal to be produced ASAP and copies sent to all participants to arrange small scale local screenings

• Separate working group e-groups to be set up to facilitate ongoing discussions and organization – this is tempery – we need a new working websight.

• Definition of project and purpose to be discussed online (Islip list) and agreed on

• Grant-making bodies to be approached for 'emergency' funds ie small amounts, to cover production and administrative costs of pilot screenings