visionOntv’s 5 main channels are aggregators, which automatically post trusted feeds of quality films from around the world. We manually promote other good films as well. This means there are interesting new films to watch every day. We are in the process of adding new aggregator channels, such as climatecamptv, olympics, and noborders.
If any cool films catch your attention, drop us an email at info (AT) visionon (DOT) tv, and we will add them.
Inside each aggregator channel there is a menu tab with the channel name on the far right. Here you will find useful resources:
Crew – tells you who is a member of the channel community. You can join the community here, to be kept up-to-date and help organise the channel.
Forum – start a discussion about anything which interests you on the channel.
Read the News – digest all the latest text news from selected reliable sources.
Publish – post your own video or text news, and have it syndicated to twitter, facebook and visionOntv’s embeds on sites around the world.
Download – get copies of films for screenings and showing to people or in places without web access.
Resources – all the resources for that channel (logos, music for films, etc)
Channels for embedding
More channels adds a large number of channels covering different topics, places and people. You can easily embed any visionOntv channels in your website or blog here. They will update automatically as new films come online.
Feel free to suggest a stream of content not already covered – write to us at info (AT) visionon (DOT) tv, and you can embed and curate your own channel. If you’ll embed it, we’ll create it. It’s a really cool way for distribution of quality independent films to grow.
Communications Minister Ed Vaizey anoucment means that the end of the internet as a open-platform comes much closer http://bit.ly/cpDh2j can’t help feeling we are sleep walking into this. Though as the undead of the corporate media is riseng from its coffins – we are seeing the peasants with burning torches in the streets #demo2010 but will site such as #fitwatch still be accessible when we lose #netneutrality and do you think your ISP will allow tools like this http://tcrn.ch/c7Ah15#Adblock any more? As paula at @fossbox says “well, they’re just handing the entire UK infrastructure to corporate empires – no discussion, no appeal 🙁 “
Its a HUGE problem, at http://visionon.tv we wont to be at the centre of the open-internet debate do you wont to help make this happen – if you do join the site and make it real the DIY way.
The Ratcliffe Swoop prosecutions caused a backlash against activist media that reverberated around the Edinburgh climate camp. We were not present at the Ratcliife Swoop, and played no part in the gathering of video there. When we saw footage posted of identifiable activists doing criminal damage, we were astonished, as throughout the history of video activism this has been an absolute “no no”, without the express consent of the activists pictured. We immediately took this material down from visionOntv accounts where it had been posted, and told the Ratclifffe media team why we did so. Regrettably the footage was later re-posted by the producers to accounts outside of our control. Having said that, as of writing, we have been unable to find out any details of the prosecutions and exactly which footage was used.
But as a response I (perhaps naively) thought it might be helpful to try to do consensus/affinity group process with activist film at the Edinburgh climate camp. To kick this off, we showed a sneak preview of END:CIV on the Saturday to a crowd of around 50-70 people which sparked off a good and respectful debate about aesthetic of activist film and the old spiky/fluffy debate about effective action. People came away challenged and thoughtful.
The next day after the action on the RBS HQ we showed the rough edit of it to get feedback and make sure it was OK to put out. It was enthusiastically received but there was also a very forceful verbal attack of “you must do this” “do it now, or you are endangering activists” and a refusal to answer simple questions about “why” in exchanges with one person. Finally, after some bad feeling, I found out that she had seen an “object for causing criminal damage” being held by one person in the film. OK, that is a genuine issue, so I agreed to look at it again. I asked her to show me where it was in the film but instead she rushed off to tell everyone that climatecamptv had refused to remove the “weapon” and that we were putting out films that were endangering activists. This led later to many different groups and individuals coming along to have their say over the next day about how the film should made.
See later where this led.
I had watched the film 3 times during editing for legals, and had shown it to to a number of other trusted people. After we had packed up the screening we looked at the “object” on the video and found it to be a plastic horn not an “object to cause criminal damage” at all. Humm… a storm in a teacup you would think, but read on.
Let’s briefly go through it – the film of the action had a few legal issues.
* The pushing on the bridge (possibly assault) leading to the earlier dressing-up sections (unmasked) being possibly incriminating of this possible assault.
* We had no video of the breaking of windows (criminal damage) thus this was less of an issue in the film. Nor did we have film of any identifiable possible perpetrators.
* There was one additional shot which could potentially have been “creatively” used by police to prosecute an activist.
* The bridge-pushing was problematic as all the activists were unmasked, with all the FIT team on the roof and 3-4 corporate media TV/photo actively filming. Many photos/images would be available so on the one hand it was clearly done in the open, and therefore accountable. On the other, if they were charged, our video would likely be used in the prosecution, both for and against the activists. It’s an issue we face many times and it unless we know otherwise we have to have to err on the side of caution. Without the opportunity to ask them whether they were accountable thus OK to show it or not, we decided to blur this section – rendering the need to blur the early stuff irrelevant as we now had no incriminating video of this “crowd” action.
The other potentially incriminating shot was removed, at the request of the individual filmed.
After running it past the affinity group made up of CCTV/visionontv crew and some trusted legal support we left it to a volunteer to polish the final edit for showing that evening before putting out to the web. In my experience you can never run a film past an audience too many times before it’s finished from both a legal and an aesthetic point of view.
The day of action was very busy, and we were all running around filming. While we were out and about a number of people came in to look at the earlier action video being edited and asked the editor to make changes – he responede to their requests and made a lot of changes to hide and obscure many details throughout the film.
When we saw the film in the evening just before the screening we were shocked. Editing a film by committee is always a disaster and the film was now an incoherent and sinister mess making climatecamp look like a bunch of criminals. We now had a film we couldn’t put out. This wasn’t our volunteer editor’s fault, it was a problem with the process we had begun but were not around to control. To top this, at the end of the day the editor had found the people who were at the front of the bridge-push and they had made it clear that they were unhappy being blurred out as it was the best thing they had done in ages. They were willing to be accountable for their actions, so we didn’t need to thus put any obscuring in the finished film.
We now had to re-do the film from an earlier version. It was dark and we were late for the nightly screening, we had one computer to gather all the films up and convert then to the right format and re-edit this film – we decided it wasn’t possible to screen the action film and concentrated on showing the other 9 finished but less exciting films we had ready. We started the screening with non-action films to cries of “we want to see the action”. So an old version of the action film was rush-encoded and was ready half-way through the screening. Unfortunately this contained the ptoentially incriminating shot we had earlier taken out, and was screened to about 40 climatecampers. NOT good. Another person had a very solid go at us…
What did we learn from this?
Should protesters never trust any video/photo on an action OR should they trust video activists as THEY know what they are doing?
For me, not trusting experienced video activists leads to the very real danger that through bureaucratisation it pushes the working affinity group structure underground and renders it ineffective – the option of bureaucratic/consensus process isn’t an option with film which is at its best a skilled creative story-based process.
But now we have to deal with the rumour mill which quickly churned around the “weapon” / plastic horn issue. Rumour has more power than truth when there isn’t a functioning media. I heard the misinformation that we had put out footage of window-smashing weapons three times while leaving the camp to get home. And that’s why I wrote this post as this rumour could distort the very real pro/anti-media debate in activism which needs to happen in a constructive way.
On the subject of social media and underground/wannabe mainstream film-makers/photographers, there are very real dangers that is the subject of another post.
Nurture basic journalism and storytelling skills in alt-media to create outreach media that people actually want to engage with. (Link – currently offline, sadly.)
Linking is key. Link to alternative resources wherever you can. The simplest and most effective way to compete with corporate news is by building a dense web of interconnected, linked alternative news sources.
Aggregation is how decentralisation works in practice. Without aggregation, decentralisation fragments and disappears.
Start local. The primary input for any alt-media project should be at the local level. From there, content should flow upward into subject-based and geographic aggregation sites – always with a clear, valid link back to the original source. This is hard, but try to avoid top-down publishing models built on consensus and bureaucracy. Where possible, let the network do the work.
“Content is just something for conversation.” This raises an open question: where does the interaction around content actually take place? This remains unresolved and needs both more thought and more technical work. For now, a diversity of approaches is probably healthiest – while always preserving the link back to the original source.
A controversial point: use corporate social media only for link-building and directing people toward contemporary, independent media projects. Avoid using corporate platforms as primary spaces of distribution or community. Do use them – and abuse them – but don’t build real communities or organisations inside them. That’s a common and costly mistake. The simple workflow is: publish on an alt-news site or blog, then share links on Facebook, Twitter, etc. Tools exist to automate this.
Be open to using all tools, but lean toward free/open-source software and open standards (#4opens) wherever possible, for two reasons:
Open systems allow others to build things with your project that you never imagined. This is where almost all meaningful innovation on the web actually comes from.
Corporate tools are structurally driven to prioritise profit over users, content, and functionality. Even the “good” ones eventually sell out, or collapse when funding runs out, and all the work you’ve built on them can vanish overnight.
RSS and Creative Commons are your friends. Use them well in every project you create.
That’s really it. Let’s work together to use the “digital hole” undermining corporate media, and replace it with something better. It’s genuinely not that difficult.
Let’s link. Let’s aggregate. Let’s build on open standards.
Hamish Campbell (typed while camping in a forest by the beach, Bay of Biscay)
The currency of the web is the link, so by linking to something you are adding to its value.
Regrettably, activists endemically link to corporate media and social networking sites thus adding value and power to these large multinational corporations they are in theory fighting against.
As a recent example (but I could pick almost any), at the CRUDE AWAKENING event on October 16th 2010, video producers put out links to alternative video sites:
And these links were re-posted for a while, but soon most re-postings and linking were direct to youtube rather than to the real producers’ websites.
Why is this a problem? Just to repeat, linking is probably the strongest currency on the web, and anti-corporate activists are too often spending it in the mega-stores rather than the much better social/political experiences of their local cornershops. We CAN build a powerful alternative to the mainstream if we spend our linking currency wisely.
LINK to alternative media whenever and wherever you can, with a valid link (includes http:// – www is no good). If you like a film, see if you like the films around it, and LINK to that flow of films, rather than a single video. There’s much more value in a flow, for viewers and for producers.
You can also embed alternative media players on your blog or website (for instance http://visionon.tv/embed) and LINK to the urls of those. This is more useful than embedding a single film from youtube.
Valid LINKS and LINKING to flows help to build alternative, non-corporate infrastructure and it’s free.
More than thirty climate activists and local residents took mass direct action to prevent excavation work on Britain’s biggest ever open-cast coal mine at Ffos-y-fran in South Wales. Climate campaigners from all over Wales joined with local people from Merthyr Tydfil to evade police and security. They’ve pledged to prevent work on the site for as long as they can by climbing onto, and chaining themselves to the 1,300 horsepower yellow diggers. “Gordon Brown’s officials this week jet off to Balifor UN talks on cutting carbon emissions but at home they’re trying to drag us into a new coal age.” “Coal is the filthiest fuel known to man and projects like this mine could destroy all our chances of tackling global warming. The battle over this hilltop in Wales is a fight for the stability of the global climate and it epitomises this government’s hypocrisy on climate change.” Check out our radical news site http://visionon.tv
Hamish Campbell interview – 332600 g8 2001 diaz school www.indymedia.org.uk A questo indirizzo potete trovare una sintesi delle testimonianze raccolte dai PM nell'inchiesta sugli abusi di BOLZANETO, prese pari pari dal settimanale Diario "Speciale Genova – la Verità" del 21 luglio 2006: http://g82001.altervista.org Sono scenari sconcertanti quelli raccontati dalle vittime di quelle violenze, fisiche e psicologiche. Scenari che risultano via via più verosimili confrontando e incrociando le testimonianze di tutti coloro siano passati dalla caserma di Bolzaneto in quei giorni.
Blacksky: This project, created by the crypto crew for the #NGO liberal types, is firmly rooted in the #dotcons sphere. While it claims to align with #openweb values, its foundation leans towards control and capital rather than grassroots paths. Yes it adds diversity to the ecosystem but will likely become another messy experiment that feeds into the compost pile. Support it if you feel inclined, but be prepared with a shovel to deal with the outcomes.
Bonfire Networks: A project from the #NGO world trying to push into grassroots territory. However, history is littered with similar efforts that fail repeatedly due to their inability to adapt to the #openweb’s native ethos. While it contributes to diversity, its trajectory reflects a pattern of missteps.
Darius Kazemi: A #mainstreaming grassroots figure who has a notable presence but seems more focused on occupying space rather than producing actionable outcomes. While there might be potential utility here, none has been apparent thus far.
db0: This one remains a mystery for now; no further insight is available.
Emelia Smith (@ThisIsMissEm): I’ve had conversations with Emelia, but their contributions seemed incoherent and mostly negative. They might align with the #fashernista tendency—style over substance. Time will tell if they add value or continue in this vein.
Erin Kissane: A figure from the NGO and academic world who shows an appreciation for grassroots efforts but is not inherently part of that ecosystem. There may be some utility here, but needs meaningful contributions.
Fediseer: An intriguing but unclear initiative. It’s worth keeping an eye on to understand its objectives and implications for the #openweb.
Independent Federated Trust and Safety (IFTAS): This group has ambitions to play a core role in trust and safety, but has yet to approach this responsibility with the respect or engagement needed for genuine collaboration. As with similar #NGO projects, it’s wise to have a shovel ready to compost any emerging mess.
Lemmy: Originally a Reddit clone, this project has taken an interesting turn by decentralizing its focus towards forums and wikis. It’s an intriguing experiment that deserves continued observation as it evolves.
Mastodon: A truly native grassroots project that has been instrumental in expanding the fediverse and the adoption of ActivityPub. However, as the project grew, it gravitated towards an #NGO-like structure and began engaging in #mainstreaming. This shift is a natural but challenging path for projects as they scale.
Newsmast Foundation: An #NGO initiative centred around liberal #mainstreaming of news flows. While it adds diversity to the ecosystem, there remains an urgent need for native grassroots media projects to balance this narrow perspective.
Pixelfed: A companion project to Mastodon with a similar ethos. While it’s a positive addition to the ecosystem, its path leans towards #mainstreaming. It’s sometimes positioned as a token example of diversity by the Mastodon team, which could become problematic if this narrative goes unchallenged.
Social Web Foundation: An #NGO-backed initiative with some grassroots influence from its current leadership. However, in vertical structures like this, leadership tends to shift with changes in funding, which will alter its trajectory.
Spritely Institute: A strong technical project focused on a more peer-to-peer (#p2p) approach. While the technology is promising, its messaging and outreach need significant improvement to achieve broader understanding and any adoption.
This list reflects the diversity and challenges within the #openweb space. It underscores the need to balance different approaches, highlight the very real lack of native grassroots efforts, and the need to remain vigilant against co-option by #dotcons and #NGO mainstreaming paths.
Blacksky is a #dotcons being built by the crypto crew for the #NGO liberal types, it is native to the #openweb so part of diversity, but, in the end likely more mess to compost, support it if you like but have a shovel handy.
Bonfire Networks comes from the #NGO world pushing into the grassroots, not native and like all projects with this motivation there is a long history they fail, and fail, and fail. It’s a problem flow in the #openweb so a part of diversity.
Darius Kazemi a #mainstreaming grassroots person, who talks and takes up space, might have some use but not as far as I know.
Emelia Smith (@ThisIsMissEm) I talked to this one, but they did not make sense and were largely negative, #fashernista maybe. Who knows, let’s see.
Erin Kissane NGO and academic guy who likes grassroots, but is not. Might have some use, but not so far as far as I know
Fediseer This is a strange one, what is this about?
Independent Federated Trust and Safety (IFTAS) An in-group pushing into a core role, not respectfully so far, but let’s see where they go. Have a shovel at hand to compost the mess.
Lemmy Has an interesting history, a clone of Reddit, then pushing the core coding out to forums and wikis, it’s interesting and worth watching.
Mastodon a native grassroots project that pushed the fediverse and activitypub wider. With this move, as the project grew, they shifted to the #NGO path and engaged in #mainstreaming as people do.
Pixelfed is a companion to mastodon, a good project, if soft and #mainstreaming in its path. Is kinda used as meto project by the mastodon crew to say the is diversity, this could be a problem if unchallenged.
Social Web Foundation is a #NGO backed project, it has a bit of grassroots to it from its current leadership, but leadership changes in vertical structures when funding flows changes.
Spritely Institute a good tech project, a more p2p path, but hard to understand, needs actual outreach.
