Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

Holding my pen, though the ink has run dried,
But I know these walls will speak,
To tell to the world, all the things they try to hide,
The words and views that should be heard.

What have they done to my lovely country,
Why all the trees are so still?
The only birds that fly are those made of steel,
They flatten my mountains and my hills.

As has been related by Margo elsewhere, one step on my journey to this place was a meeting with our local MP, Tony Abbott, to express our concerns about the way the war in Iraq had been handled. In that meeting Abbott said “if in the end there are no WMD and Iraq has a fundamentalist government, it won’t have been worth it”. We asked him if he was prepared to debate that in a public forum, and to his credit he said yes, and duly did – you can read a full transcript of the debate at the North Shore Peace and Democracy website.

When we came to advertise the debate with a media release, Margo pitched up in our dining room with a bottle of red and (with frequent breaks for her to nip outside for a smoke) we talked into the night about how hard it was getting to have real debate in Australian politics – both sides just shout slogans and issue soundbites that belittle or ignore the other side – and there almost always is a real point of concern in the view from the other side.

We've arrived in Futureworld now.  In this new world, the people will be empowered by technology to redress the power balance. For a long time, the powerful have been concentrating control.  Media in Australia is less diverse, less independent, and less interesting than ever. Politics seems more cynical than ever and business seems more ruthless than ever.  Media, politics and business work in ways that only a short time ago were considered unthinkable.

"I was going to write another piece for this new genesis of Webdiary, a piece about anger and my want to change the world and how Webdiary has allowed me to express my opinion to a large audience and why I was connected and driven to help change and extend the ideals and ethics of those who had been long term Webdiarists.

However, during the initial writing and the re-writing and editing the world changed. What is it that John Lennon said, "Life is what happens to you whilst busy making other plans"?" Marc MacDonald

"I sat at his funeral, listening to a liturgy that touched on war (the issue of Iraq's disarmament had reached a crisis; Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan occurred; we had been working with warriors), and the priest spoke about the way my colleague, my friend, had as a child written a moving plea for world peace. All the while I contemplated how I was living my own life. Reflecting on what small part I played in bigger things, and whether I was doing what is best. When I am called to account (or rather some priest recounts my deeds) what will be said?" Craig Rowley 

For years, I took no interest in political affairs or debate. It is far easier, in some ways, to take what is dished out by our leaders and just join the line at the checkout. But I found myself incensed at the latest Iraq invasion, and at the misleading manner in which our leaders swindled the public into supporting their neo-colonial resource war. Our other military engagements closer to home, in particular our involvement in East Timor, I found just as misleading and contrived, as it too smelt of neo-colonial greed over vital resources.

Those who profess to favour freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are people who want crops without ploughing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning and they want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters:

This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted.

As the new age of the internet public media continues to dawn it is indeed exciting to be part of the new digital world of socially responsive and interactive journalism. Like the universe itself there are many uncharted regions here and the patrons of Club Chaos are going to have to get used to some new rides and some new drinks.

If we were immortal we could contemplate knowing it all. We could harbour ambitions of total understanding and comprehension of all things. We could pretend that we, as individuals, seek the truth. It might even be some kind of race: which immortal can reach Nirvana first? Our mortality says to us, quite simply, ‘Forget it, you’ll be dead before you’ve really started’.

G'day. In March this year I advised Webdiarists in Club Chaos general meeting that I could no longer cope with Webdiary on my own, and several people offered to help. Discussions continued in comments to Club Chaos GM: my thoughts, Jack R to pull beers at Club Chaos and Upgrading Webdiary: a call for volunteers. When it became clear that Webdiary would need to go independent to pursue its vision interested Webdiarists rallied to make it happen.

I'm the buck stops here person. I set the overall direction for Webdiary and have overall responsibility for the content of the site and the direction we take. Harry Heidelberg created our temporary home and threw a sensational 5th anniversary party for Webdiary which brought those of us dreamers who could get to Sydney a chance to meet for the first time. Jack Robertson was contributing editor at a crucial time - the time when I would have given up without assistance to meet the demands and expectactions of Webdiarists. Hamish Alcorn is our transition manager, Kerri Browne is our comments manager, Marc Macdonald is our strategist and PF Journey has taken charge of the challenging task of working out how to make Webdiary financially sustainable. David Roffey is our troubleshooter and Polly Bush is our official historian and pisstaker. Caroline Compton looks after planning and administration. Carl Baker is our website designer. Ian McPherson, David Browning , Nigel Sim and James Woodcock are building our permanent home and Roger Fedyk is our archivist. John Augustus found me a fantastic lawyer and David Roffey, Roger Fedyk, Craig Rowley, Michael Ekin Smyth and Caroline Compton pitched in to edit comments.

We haven't finalised the structure of the independent Webdiary yet, and I'll let you know all about it as soon as we do. Webdiary is not a a political party, a lobby group or a charity. It is not lefty and it is not righty. The priority here is independent media.

If you'd like to join the team, or help in any capacity you wish, let me know.

Margo Kingston

G'day Webdiarists, and thank you for visiting Club Chaos at this chaotic time.

While we're here, please let me know about any hassles you have using the facilities by posting  a comment. And if you're a Moveable Type whiz who has ways to improve on what we've done, please post!

A small team of  volunteer technical whizes are building Webdiary a new and permanent open-source home (if you'd like to help let me know) and after we move in we'll develop your ideas and mine to further Webdiary's Charter. Webdiarists, we've now got our hands on the levers of  content AND and the publishing platform. If we build the foundations right for Webdiary's home I reckon we'll have fun creating it together.

Come back any time,

Kingo

kingstonmargo@yahoo.com.au

MARGO NOTE: I am reviewing my charter in the light of the move. All input welcome.

First published April 26, 2001, in Webdiary entry "What's the point?"

I believe:

* that widely read broadsheet newspapers are essential to the health and vibrancy of our democracy

The mission of the Webdiary is:

* to experiment in the form and content of the Herald online

MARGO NOTE: Webdiary's ethics remain the same, save that the Sydney Morning Heralds' ethics guidelines no longer apply. I have therefore deleted references to that document.

I want you to trust Webdiary. Trust is the ideal at the core of all professional ethics codes, which are guidelines for conduct which aim to achieve that ideal. I'm a journalist bound by a code of ethics drafted to apply to traditional journalism. I've adapted the code to meet the responsibilities of running Webdiary, and set out guidelines for your contributions. These guidelines are always open for discussion and debate on Webdiary and can be clarified and added to as issues arise.

My obligations

1. I will strive to comply with the Media Alliance codes of ethics, which will be in a prominent position on this site at all times.

2. In particular, I will correct errors of fact on Webdiary as soon as possible after they are brought to my attention and will disclose and explain any inadvertent breach of my ethical duties on Webdiary at the first available opportunity.

3. I will respond on Webdiary to all non-frivolous queries or complaints about my compliance with the codes and give a copy of queries or complaints to the online editor.

4. I will not belittle or show disrespect for any reader's contributions I publish, or to any person who emails me.

5. I will do my utmost to ensure that Webdiary is a space to which all readers, whatever their views or style, feel safe to contribute. If you are offended by something in Webdiary, feel free to respond. I won't publish any material which incites hatred.

6. I will let you know when archives have been changed except when changes do not alter their substance, for example corrections to spelling or grammar. I will amend archived Webdiary entries to include corrections of fact and advise you accordingly.

7. I won't publish all publishable emails, but I will read every one unless there's too many to reasonably do so in the time available. If I haven't been able to read all emails, I'll let you know on Webdiary.

8. My decisions on publication will be made in good faith, without bias towards those I agree with or am sympathetic towards.

9. I reserve the right to edit contributions.

10. I will publish most contributions made in good faith which are critical of Webdiary's content or direction, or of me.

My expectations of you

As a journalist I have ethical obligations to readers; as a contributor you do not. Still, there's a few guidelines I'd like you to follow. David Davis, who's read and contributed to Webdiary from its beginning and helped draft these guidelines, explains why. "Webdiary encourages free and open debate. The guidelines for contributors are not designed to curtail this, but to remind you that just as you live in a community in the real world, the same is true in the online world. Being part of a community carries many rights, but there are responsibilities. Rather than eroding the rights, these responsibilities actually protect them."

1. If you don't want to use your real name, use a nom de plume and briefly explain, for publication, why you don't want to use your real name. Please send me your real name on a confidential basis if you choose to use a nom de plume. I will not publish attacks on other contributors unless your real name is used.

2. Disclose affiliations which you think could reasonably be perceived to affect what you write. For example, if you are writing about politics, disclose your membership of a political party.

3. Don't plagiarise, that is don't use the ideas of others without telling us where they came from, and don't copy the writings of others and pass them off as your own. There's no need. Put quotes around the words of other people, and tell us who they are and where you got them from. If you've used online sources for your contributions, include the links so others can follow them up.

4. Be truthful. Don't invent 'facts'. If you're caught out, expect to be corrected in Webdiary.

5. Robust debate is great, but don't indulge in personal attacks on other contributors.

6. Write in the first person. Remember, we're having a conversation here.

Complaints

I am bound by the code of ethics of the Media Alliance union, of which I am a member. The Alliance code follows. To complain about a breach of the code, contact me and/or the Media Alliance. To comment on, question or complain about Webdiary's ethics, post to this entry and I will respond as soon as possible.

MEDIA ALLIANCE CODE OF ETHICS

Respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism. Journalists describe society to itself. They convey information, ideas and opinions, a privileged role. They search, disclose, record, question, entertain, suggest and remember. They inform citizens and animate democracy. They give a practical form to freedom of expression. Many journalists work in private enterprise, but all have these public responsibilities. They scrutinise power, but also exercise it, and should be accountable. Accountability engenders trust. Without trust, journalists do not fulfil their public responsibilities. MEAA members engaged in journalism commit themselves to

* Honesty

* Fairness

* Independence

* Respect for the rights of others

1. Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts. Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis. Do your utmost to give a fair opportunity for reply.

2. Do not place unnecessary emphasis on personal characteristics, including race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, age, sexual orientation, family relationships, religious belief, or physical or intellectual disability.

3. Aim to attribute information to its source. Where a source seeks anonymity, do not agree without first considering the sources motives and any alternative attributable source. Where confidences are accepted, respect them in all circumstances.

4. Do not allow personal interest, or any belief, commitment, payment, gift or benefit, to undermine your accuracy, fairness or independence.

5. Disclose conflicts of interest that affect, or could be seen to affect, the accuracy, fairness or independence of your journalism. Do not improperly use a journalistic position for personal gain.

6. Do not allow advertising or other commercial considerations to undermine accuracy, fairness or independence.

7. Do your utmost to ensure disclosure of any direct or indirect payment made for interviews, pictures, information or stories.

8. Use fair, responsible and honest means to obtain material. Identify yourself and your employer before obtaining any interview for publication or broadcast. Never exploit a persons vulnerability or ignorance of media practice.

9. Present pictures and sound which are true and accurate. Any manipulation likely to mislead should be disclosed.

10. Do not plagiarise.

11. Respect private grief and personal privacy. Journalists have the right to resist compulsion to intrude.

12. Do your utmost to achieve fair correction of errors.

Guidance Clause

Basic values often need interpretation and sometimes come into conflict. Ethical journalism requires conscientious decision-making in context. Only substantial advancement of the public interest or risk of substantial harm to people allows any standard to be overridden.

*

For a comprehensive discussion of Webdiary ethics, see my piece Webdiary's ethics.

Feel free to post information and links below.

"This issue has an iconic substance about it that really means that the ramifications of my decision affects my whole party, the party that I represent. Whether it goes forward. Whether it survives or not. And to be completely frank, if the National Party was not to survive, the Australian political environment would become a very much poorer place. It would become very bipolar. You'd really only need four people in the chamber and everyone else could go home. We have to make sure we get this right, not just for Queensland, not just for the future of the National Party, but for the future of a broader view in the political scene in Australia's future."...

"I am not an abortion debate expert, I haven’t talked to 500,000 people about this issue in a clinical study. I do not know how prevalent these views are among the pro-choice crowd, nor do I claim that I am covering everything in this article. I would appreciate your input into the debate, so long as it is both rational and keeping to a general standard of respect for both sides of this debate – including both the people and their views. You can disagree, passionately, or agree vehemently, but civility will be prized, while ad hominem will not." Stuart Lord

Joyce has harnessed people power to stop the sale by convincing very cynical voters that he was different. Then he proved to be the same, almost in an INSTANT! Re-read his maiden speech just 2 days ago, the day after after he was supposed to have been just about won over by the big boys in the Coalition. The Telstra story isn't over yet, folks. Icarus Joyce will get so many emails and irate contact in other forms from pissed off Ozzies he'll either change his mind or collapse as a centred human being.

"Ideologically, the Australian nation is no longer committed to social democratic or socialist ideals of a kind that were often seen to be the cutting edge of practical socialism in the antipodean British colonies a century ago." Bob Catley believes November 11, 1975 "ended the high water mark of the political left in Australia" and began "the transformation of Australia from a regulated economy and egalitarian society embracing a national political culture of social democracy, to a predominantly liberal economy, a more inegalitarian society, and a laissez faire national ideology".

"Politics talks in riddles and packs with verbiage what is absolutely crystal clear at the mother’s morning tea or the local hotel. Politics appears to be the art of telling half the story and your followers guess the rest while using the absence of the complete message as a defence against the implication drawn by your deriders. When things get contentious we blame our faction or the joint party room as a reason that plasters over a personal political ambition. It leaves a political monoculture that can be less than inspiring and does not give credit to the public’s ability to hear all sides of the debate and understand that a decision which favors one side has to be made. It would be nice to see the debate unencumbered in this chamber, not in the caucus or the joint party room. Neither of these are mentioned in the constitution and it is a convenient appendix designed by political parties that was specifically not entailed in the constitution." Barnaby Joyce.

G'day. Barnaby Joyce will make his maiden speech to the Senate just before 6pm. He could well be Pauline Hanson with brains, the latest maverick thrown up by Queensland regional and rural voters to demand a 'please explain' or else. The big issue now, as it has been for a long time, is the full sale of Telstra. Seventy percent of Australians don't want it. Rural and regional Australians fear they'll get left behind on communications if it is, and they don't trust the Libs or most of the Nats to ensure it isn't so. And no wonder! The Nats betrayed the bush over Telstra long ago, before the 1998 election, in fact, in a Senate vote on Saturday, July 11, 1998. THE NATS VOTED TO SELL ALL OF TELSTRA. Ex-Labor Senator Mal Colston, who sold his soul to the Libs in exchange for getting deputy president of the Senate, finally said NO! The Judas National Party Senators still sitting in the Senate groaning about Barnaby Joyce were Ron Boswell (Qld), Sandy Macdonald (NSW) (alleged to have helped try to bribe Tony Windsor so the Nats could get his seat) and Julian McGauran (Vic), the bloke who gave the Senate the 'up yours' last week. They worked within the system alright, and they're still alright, aren't they.

"Today, sadly, what are sold as family friendly policies are really market friendly policies. The major parties struggle to reconcile their professed family values with their free-market mantra. They struggle because the two cannot be reconciled. The mantra of choice, competition and consumerism is in conflict with family and community. Often it seems we live in a world where few values matter except those of the market." Senator Steve Fielding.

G'day. Last December I set out my predictions for the collapse of the last real parliamentary accountibility for John Howard and his ministers - the Senate. The government would really be saying up yours to all of us by doing this, of course, and Senator Julian McGauran did the gesture in the Senate last week in a helpful visualisation of the government's contempt for our democracy. Of course Howard, our perception-trumps-reality king, frowned and said that was very bad. I thought it was honest, but, of course, that's very bad. Webdiary will keep a very close watch on the Senate, and today, long-time Democrats Senator Andrew Bartlett kicks off with his thoughts on what is to come.

Many Webdiarists want to know the detail of what the nation is arguing about over John Howard's IR revolution. He hasn't given us detail yet, but the Parliamentary Library has pulled together the background, what's on the table so far, and who is playing how. Let's add the twists and turns through comments.

"We all know that the media can no longer be trusted, that their performance is incompetent ... that they broadcast blatant lies as if they were manifest truths." Veteran Oz journo Phillip Knightley citing Le Monde with approval.

"Ideally, ‘information’ advertisements paid for by public money should relate to legislation already enacted (or at least fully discussed by the Parliament) and any judgmental argumentation in them should be scrupulously balanced, with alternative views presented. The ads should also be subject to independent oversight. Recent advertisements such as on GST in 1998, on Medicare in 2004 and most recently on industrial relations (IR) reform fail these tests. The decisions were made by a Government Committee (the Ministerial Committee on Government Communications) which is not accountable to Parliament or answerable to Cabinet and not subject to independent oversight. Nor can their content be described as non-political. The Broadcasting Services Act offers no great impediment to the broadcasting of blatant political advertising by governments using taxpayers’ funds." Fred Argy

G'day. Who amongst us is unAustralian and why? Are there ANY common values we can agree on in these tipping point days? And if there are, how can citizens insist that laws, policies and practice adhere to these values?

"Our chairperson kicked off proceedings by suggesting that Chen’s defection from the Chinese Communist Party is the biggest event in Australia-China relations since Tiananmen. Why did he sacrifice such a brilliant career, she asked? ‘I want to live as a man of dignity,’ Chen said, telling us that in China there is no such thing as freedom of speech. For those who risk it there is ‘prison, or you get sent to mental hospital’. We all chuckled at what we assumed was a witticism, but soon came to our senses. This was no joke." Chris Saliba

On October 23 and 24, 2003 the Senate President, Paul Calvert, played out his capitulation to the Prime Minister in degrading the Senate and betraying his obligations to show equal respect for every Senator elected by the Australian people. Today, Labor voted with the Coalition to re-elect him Senate President in the new Senate in the full knowledge that he had already AGAIN betrayed his obligations by ordering without consultation with any non-government Senator new gerrymandered Question Time rules favouring Family First's Steve Fielding.

"The longer that I have served in this place, the greater the respect I have for the good sense and collective wisdom of the British people. On Iraq, I believe that the prevailing mood of the British people is sound. They do not doubt that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but they are not persuaded that he is a clear and present danger to Britain. They want inspections to be given a chance, and they suspect that they are being pushed too quickly into conflict by a US Administration with an agenda of its own." Robin Cook, deceased, March 17, 2003 in the British Parliament

G'day. I'm in Parliament House writing this as a Senate Committee formed when the Senate had the power of numbers to investigate government misdeeds interrogates officials over Chen and Alvarez. Tomorrow the new Senate sits and the dance begins with new steps. Today Webdiary's faith and values columnist, Phil Uebergang, writes of our dreams while asleep.