let’s start with history. The editorial workflow of #OMN is based on #indymediaback which is based on basic grassroots journalism growing from radical anarchist traditions.
The newswire is made up of original content published to the site and aggregated flows from a trust network of #4opens sites built out of a community of interest/affinity groups.
Using the #5W and #4opens we start the step away from “post truth” by grounding this flow in a community of action bounded by physical locations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ws
The “news” value of “this happened” Who, What, When, Where, Why.
From this a feature flow is built by the core affinity group to show the #5W storeys from different views as a “consensuses” centre column articles.
These articles are then aggregated to other subject/geographic instances newswires.
In this the small streams/flows build a strong river of “social truth” that feeds into seeding a more humane world.
The wider #OMN network, using the fresh newswire and aggregated features to build wider features – these “social truth” networks links the humane world from a grounded real grassroots action/communities.
We build society from the bootem up rather than the old top down of #traditionalmedia/governances.
This itself shifts and moves solutions by aggregation and drives social economics to #4opens humane agender. In the end we play/build a new more humane/ecological world.
To move this part of the project on:
We need “news” a flow of subject/geographic 5W newswire posts on the 3 test instances – then we need to cross-link these by turning the instance based flows into feature articles.
These are aggregated across to the other instances and pushed out to the #fedivers for comments and feedback which then flows back into the #indymediaback instances to the newswire. This new flow needs to be cross-linked into articles, all linking back to the source.
From this we can flesh out the training resources and start the outreach of the project properly, build the power of different voices.
It’s now hard to get an easy view of the death of #indymedia as a lot of the most shitty behaver was taken offline as a part of the ripping that tore the project apart. For the #OMN this is a problem that we strongly need to mediate when implementing “individualistic” rights/workflows. We need to keep metadata flows intact to build trust and history. This challenge raises questions on the balance between privacy and transparency.
The were internal and external forces… I tend to concentrate on the internal as it’s the area that we actually have power/responsibility to make work. The external is a harder task that we then have to fight to challenge/change.
The problem of academics covering activism, particularly within grassroots movements like #Indymedia, is the significant disconnect between academic interpretations and the realities on the ground. This gap is not a matter of perspective but represents a fundamental systematic misunderstanding of the dynamics and operational mechanisms of activist movements.
The disconnect is that academics gravitate towards more visible and vocal members of activist circles, the #fashernistas. These are, often, passionate and articulate, but are not in any way the people making the movement’s wheels turn. The core of activism, the real work, is carried out by those who are too busy to engage with academia because they are immersed in the day-to-day efforts of driving change.
The history of the Indymedia project is a case in point. Indymedia was a pioneering effort in the early 2000s to create an open publishing platform for grassroots journalists. Its story is a rich tapestry of collaboration, innovation, and relentless dedication. However, much of the academic writing on Indymedia misses the mark, focusing instead on surface-level narratives. For a deeper understanding of the Indymedia project’s history from someone who was actively involved, you can read my activism stories.
Academia push analyses that are often removed from the practical realities of activism. The theoretical frameworks and methodologies used serve more to fulfil academic desires for publication and recognition than to provide a faithful representation of activist efforts. This creates a body of work that can be described as “wish-fulfilling #fashernista wank,” offering little insight into the actual functioning of the movements they are supposed to be covering.
The consequences of this misrepresentation are significant. Historical records, influenced heavily by academic accounts, paint an inaccurate picture of how movements operated and succeeded. This not only distorts the past but also impacts future activists who look to these records for guidance and inspiration. The narratives crafted by academics sideline the contributions of the true workhorses of the movement, leading to a strongly skewed and broken understanding of what is effective in activism.
To bridge this gap, we need academics to engage more deeply with the core activists, those whose hands are dirty from the work of making change happen. This requires a shift from seeking out the most vocal and visible to those who are often unseen but indispensable. Additionally, activists themselves must recognize the importance of documenting their efforts and experiences, ensuring that future narratives reflect the true spirit and mechanics of their movements.
There is a #OMN project for this #makeinghistory, which matters as we do need more authentic dialogue between academics and activists, to build a more accurate and useful body of knowledge that actually honours and reflects the efforts of those who actually are driving change.
A Q&A on this:
Q. I wish the hacker culture connection to anarchism was more thorough and consistent. It looks a lot more like privileged fuckery and pet insurrections. It could be that the academic scene wasn’t representative of the movement as a whole
In my view, if people want the truth, a good place to start a project like this would be to look through the #indymedia email archives for an “original” anarchist workflow. I would not take much notice of the “official” history’s of indymedia as they are full of academic wank. The theoretical analysis of the time is all pushing agenders that ripped the project apart and killed it – while it is interesting to see this nasty process, but it’s much less useful as exacting history of what actually happened. The whole internal process is saved in open email lists now hosted on archive.org no other anarchist project is this well documented.
Best not to add to the activist “mannerism” in our shared history, it’s really bad all ready. That is if we are to have hope for “anarchism” fluffy and spiky playing a role in saving a humane/ecological world we need.
Almost everything made in alt-radical tech is obviously pointless and only feeds #fahernista churn.
Why #indymediaback is not a pointless radical tech project.
#nothingnew mediates the churning of pointless tech projects by building things that already work.
In the #fedivers we use this tradition to replace existing #dotcons projects as new #openweb projects
This replicating the #dotcons with #openweb versions has its limits. All code is “ideology” so bringing in the #deathcult to the #openweb by direct copying has its own issues to work through.
We mediate this problem by recreating a widely used radical tech project #indymedia with good existing workflow and embedded in wide radical social networks/agreements.
The value balance in #indymediaback is not in the tech though that is needed. It’s in the #nothingnew social side of the project, without this continuity we have a pointless tech project.
Food for thought.
The #geekproblem is not actually interested in the #openweb as a human value network. Instead, they often feed off the current mess in different unhealthy ways. Feeding off the dying #openweb is bowing down to the #deathcult
Looked at it this way the need for change becomes more obvuse and active carrot and stick work important.
The #OMN is a shovel to compost this inhuman mess.
We have a #activertypub codebase ready for testing, we have two campanes that asked for instances. We have stable hosting paid up for the next few years.
What we don’t have is any on the ground outreach/training/networking due the covide shutdown. We have limited tech dev needed to update the code from user feedback as a part of the roll out.
With this level of commitment we would be in danger of taking focus away from their current #dotcons outreach and taking up energy rather than helping with good outcomes for the campanes.
One uncomfortable thing we need to address, calmly and constructively, is this: for the last decade, the right has been better at cooperating around #openweb media than the left.
This isn’t because the right has better politics. It’s because they’ve been more pragmatic about infrastructure. While much of the left argued endlessly about identity, fashion, theory, tone, and purity, right-wing and reactionary groups quietly built linking ecosystems: shared blogs, cross-posting networks, video hubs, newsletters, forums, and self-hosted media that reinforced each other. They understood, often instinctively, that control of distribution matters more than rhetorical perfection.
By contrast, the left has been worse than useless on some of the basics. Something as simple as linking between radical media projects has often failed. Projects compete for attention, split over minor differences, or collapse into internal conflict. Even when the politics align, cooperation doesn’t follow. The result? Fragmentation without any resilience.
Ironically, the few left-wing media projects that have succeeded at scale largely did so by abandoning alternative tech altogether. They built their audiences and careers inside the #dotcons – Twitter/X, YouTube, Facebook, Substack – accepting algorithmic dependency as the cost of survival. That choice brought reach, but at the price of autonomy, long-term stability, solidarity and real political leverage.
This isn’t a moral judgement – it’s a structural observation. Platforms reward individual brands, they block collective ecosystems. Once inside that logic, cooperation becomes optional and is often discouraged.
Where progressives have quietly seceded is not primarily in party politics or campaigning, but in lifestyle and cultural subcultures. This is where the #fediverse, #Mastodon, and other #openweb tools first took root. These spaces were driven by values – privacy, autonomy, care, consent – rather than reach or growth.
For a long time, that made them feel “apolitical” in the narrow sense. But in reality, they were deeply political, just not aligned with electoral or media spectacle cycles. They were building infrastructure for different kinds of social relations, not greed feed messaging machines.
Alongside this, we’re seeing tools being used more explicitly for radical and progressive agendas. Projects like #VisionOnTV and #IndymediaBack are reconnecting media with movement. Spaces like #Kolektiva bring an explicitly #fashionista anarchist politics into federated infrastructure. And frameworks like #OMN (Open Media Network) focus on shared process, trust, and governance rather than branding or growth.
This is important because as #mainstreaming accelerates and trust in the #dotcons continues to erode, both progressive and reactionary groups move further into the #openweb. The question is not whether this will happen, it’s how we shape the culture and norms of these spaces.
The right tends to treat tech instrumentally: as a tool for mobilisation, influence, and power accumulation. That can make them effective in the short term, but it often leads to centralisation, cults of personality, and brittle structures that fracture under pressure.
The left, when it’s at its best, treats tech as part of a broader social ecology: something that should support care, plurality, mutual aid, and collective agency. But when the left fails, it fails by refusing to build — mistaking critique for action, and purity for strategy.
The #openweb doesn’t automatically belong to anyone. It’s a terrain of struggle. If progressives don’t show up, cooperate, and do the boring work of linking, hosting, moderating, and sustaining infrastructure, others will fill that vacuum. This is why now is the time to make your space in this network and be heard.
Not by abandoning existing networks overnight, but by practicing a #stepback: one foot in, one foot out. Staying connected where people are, while actively building and strengthening open alternatives. Helping others take that step, rather than shaming them for not already being there.
If we could build #dotcons social media, we can build #openweb social infrastructure. If we could centralise power, we can federate it. The #openweb path is not a retreat, it’s a return to shared ownership, shared memory, and shared responsibility. And it’s long past time the left took it seriously again.
If you would like to help with moving away from this current world/media mess please create an account: https://unite.openworlds.info this is the organizing space, yes this is to complex and needs to be made simpler and more #KISS but for now it’s what we have and works fine. Have a read through the issues and wikis on each #openweb project.
We have a public chat room here where you can get to know the crew and talk about the projects. Yes we know its complex, but agen it does work – here is a “easy” link for android phones https://conversations.im/j/indymediaback@conference.chat.openworlds.info or you will have to be geeky/ask for help and work it out from here: indymediaback@conference.chat.openworlds.info for other platforms.
Sorry about this it’s the #geekproblem that we are working to mediate and with your participation we CAN build useable tools.
If you feel you cannot help with tech/user side then you can support the core project with money here https://opencollective.com or if you don’t have money (we all understand) turn up and make tea at your local protest camp to talk about the #indymediaback#OMN project.
You all built the #dotcons that gave him the power… phww… please try to do better next #indymediaback
Q. The far right have mastered the internet for recruitment and disinformation, the rest of us are barely in the game, would a completely regulation free internet not benefit them and lead to fascism? If so, how should regulation work to stop them?
A. that’s a good question, that the is no easy answer too. Most liberal regulation of the internet are clearly disastrous so this is a bad direction to push. This leaves us only one option to do a better job ourselves. This is currently the only real option we have available #indymediaback#omn
Of course, we have to shovel a pile of post-modern, liberal careerist shit out the way to make room for this radical/ progressive #openweb media. I look around and mostly see “our” media adding to the stinking shit pile we need to compost. Our first step is away from our own mess #OMN
Q. Lies travel faster than the truth, the far right understand that and exploit it without conscience. Without moderation, I cannot see how to combat it
A. Pessimism travels faster than optimism, but only optimism has any hope of creating the change we need. Feed the problem or solve the problem, the is no “third way”
The majority of #mainstreaming#openweb tech projects have the assumption that human nature is a fixed thing and that every project has to be built in reaction to the 40 years of neo-liberal #deathcult that we all live in now as this is the “only” human nature visible. They completely miss/ignorer the social nature of people in groups in this look back at the 20th century, and we have clearly different views of human nature as examples to build society. Call it social democracy, call it communism, call it what you like. We DO NOT have to build tools in relation to the #deathcult, and we clearly should not base “hope” on tools that are built in this relation.
Mastodon, activertypub and the fedivers took a small #stepaway from this mess. The #OMN takes the next step away. For the rest #compost and #shovels come to mind.
All these projects work off the same core code/workflow of tagging and editing metadata.
#Indymediaback is the news part of the project. This is to grow journalism from the grassroots and to make our news mainstream.
#Makinghistory – is the archiving project. This is to preserve and grow our history from the grassroots and make our history mainstream.
#Friendsandfamily – is the social networking project. For family/affernerty groups to move away from the mainstream #dotcons and to nourish the grassroots.
The #OMN project is more important for what it does not do. The is a core/ perfiery outlook, more than 99% of peoples input from mainstream tech culture is clearly coming from the perfery for the human centred workflow of the #OMN Our mission is to shift through the tech pile and find the 1% that is core to the human project. Avoid getting lost in the stinky, shiny, fashions that the majority push.
A good project needs focus, without it you just have a diluted mess. In a world driven by #stupidindividualism we have problems with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faith to constantly overcome. Generally people have no idea they are coursing a problem which makes it difficult to deal with.
For the January meeting am interested in looking in detail at #activertypub (and the new tech around it) as we should have a wider outline of the social #OMN project by then and have an urgent need to find technology that fits into it. Good focus for this meeting. Of course everyone is welcome.
This should lead to working on the next codebase of the #indymediaback project.
1) One of the main ones is co-option by #NGO agender, both, by organizations who push for “common sense” #dotcons paths and individuals who strive to build their careers by trampling over the grassroots horizontality.
2) Second, I know a lot of people who would fuck over the future for petty personal grudges and narrow self subsistence. It’s a problem with rolling out positive grassroots projects like #indymediaback that we need to actively mediate for a good outcome.It’s interesting to think about this at a small personal scale and the wider social issue of #stupidindividualism and the #deathcult that breeds this.
3) Third, let me say something unfashionable, am a fan of liberals, they created meany of the good social things in the world. BUT Intolerant and dogmatic liberals are a constant drain, pushing of “common sense” agender over every issue they touch. This shit smeared problem needs constant mediation.
4) Fourth, the #geekproblem which is looked at in other posts on this blog – click on the hashtag to find them.
5) There are more please comment so i can add them.
The fallow flower beds/farm that is #indymedia needs to be bought back to life slowly with as little change to the structure as possible. In our current social tech state just about ANY change will start ripping and when this starts it escalates quickly to do real damage. The original 2000-2008’ish structures cover 90% of issues in a good way, let’s live with that for a while.
The are a host of outstanding big issues in the remaining 10% that are undefined – let’s concentrate our energies on these missing bits and roll out solutions respecting “diversity of tactics”. The ansears to the missing 10% generally cannot be found pre-defined, we should be very weary of people coming in with fixed agender. Diversity and good process in hand with on the ground #4opens working overtime as a part of the real network is the ONLY valued test.
Slow/diversity/nurture vs fast/dogmatic/tearing. To highlight now before we roll out bigger, there will be lots of the second and little of the first much of the time. It is just how it is…
* #4opens is not dogma, it’s simply the last 30 years of open source development codified as social structure.
* PGA is not dogma, it’s the embodied wishes/dreams and planning of thousands of peoples over meany country’s and years of time.
* Indymedia is not dogma, it’s the expirence of meany radical media groups coming together to build an open network to fight neoliberalism (#deathcult) on the ground, in the streets, in the fields and online.
The difference between indymedia and the hundreds of failed “radical” media projects over the last 20 years is that indymedia flourished for a good time before it succumbed to the “forgetting” of the #PGA and #4opens foundation it was built on and was thus helpless against the internal forces that ripped it apart. Leaving no malubilerty to shift to the heavy blows from the forces attacking from the outside.
We core crew need to learn how to become benign older folks who answer every “better” solution put forward by the thrusting young with “how does that work with the #4opens” then fallow up with “lets look to see if that furthers the PGA hallmarks” to all their enthusiastic “youth” energy for “change”. Keep it gentle and most importantly, keep the focus…
At meany stages there will be howling mobs soured by hatred and through wing shit to create a stinking mess… our job is to keep focus and calm… a hard thing to do in a messy/disaster world #Brexit and #climatechaos pushes, but it’s the simple job we are taking on.
