I share Ed's concern as well.  ICANN sends out dozens of PR "news" pieces a day, if any one of them seems relevant to NCSG's members, any member can forward it on to the others on the list with no qualms.  But I think decisions about which PR "news" pieces are relevant to NCSG members should remain with NCSG members.  Let's not ask staff to make those decisions for us.

Thanks,
Robin


On May 19, 2015, at 8:29 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> I very strongly support Edward's view on this. 
> The issue does not reflect on our support staff member, who is just doing what staff members are told to do. 
> It's a broader issue within ICANN. 
> 
> ICANN the organization is a PR juggernaut. I have noticed this in the stewardship transition process. 
> It devotes a very large amount of resources to defining and controlling the narrative. Which is problematic when it is a major interested player in the outcome. A lot of this is indeed well-motivated, in that ICANN is just keeping its community informed. But there is a very fine line between that and shaping the debate, PR, and even propaganda. It would be incredibly naïve of us not to be aware of that. So thanks for the pushback, Ed, and hope Mrayam takes no offense as this has nothing to do with her. It's just that this list is for SG discussion, initiated and sustained by NCSG members, and not a PR channel for ICANN's management. 
> 
> --MM
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>> Behalf Of Edward Morris
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 2:52 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Video: A Community Message from Fadi
>> Chehad�
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I very much disagree.  It is her job to relay to the list any and all
>>> posted information that might be of interest to the SG.
>> 
>> I wasn't aware of that. I felt staff support was intended to relieve
>> volunteers of administrative chores. I wasn't aware it entailed non-
>> administrative content and editorial submissions.
>> 
>> 
>>> It is not her
>>> job to decide whether something is or is not propaganda - to some
>>> extent it is all propoganda-ish.
>> 
>> Disagree. For example, notification of meeting times and methods is
>> not propaganda. It is administrative in nature. Nowhere is it claimed
>> that it was anyone's job to determine whether something was
>> propaganda. However, once staff starts to submit non-administrative
>> content to the list he or she assumes some editorial control over
>> substantive content. IMHO it is not appropriate for staff members to
>> do this on the members list, a list BTW we have purposely kept on non-
>> ICANN servers, in part, in order to maintain our independence.
>> 
>> Ed
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 19-May-15 08:00, Edward Morris wrote:
>>>> Hi everybody,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm posting this to the PC list as the policy arm of the NCSG.
>>>> 
>>>> The following email from Maryam made me a bit uneasy. It's not
>> just
>>>> the possibility of recurring nightmares from viewing once again the
>>>> 'Fadi hands' video. :) Rather I don't feel it is appropriate for an
>>>> ICANN staff member to use his or her posting privileges on the
>>>> members list to disseminate what I would consider ICANN
>> propaganda.
>>>> 
>>>> It's perfectly fine for a member to post such a link and often we do.
>>>> I just think having staff do the same opens a path I'd prefer not to
>>>> go down. Nonmembers, obviously, do not have the right to post on
>> the
>>>> members list and I'd suggest that staff posting rights be limited to
>>>> administrative matters unless directed otherwise by the Chair / EC
>> or
>>>> in response to a members question or request. It's protection not
>>>> only for the independence of the NCSG that concerns me, it's for
>>>> protection of the staff as well. I don't want the staff member(s)
>>>> involved to be open to pressure from ICANN corporate to get
>> certain
>>>> approved perspectives out to our members. That's not their role,
>> not
>>>> how their job performance should be measured, and not why they
>> have
>>>> been allowed posting privileges on the members list. IMHO It's just
>> not good practice.
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>> On May 18, 2015, at 4:00 PM, Maryam Bakoshi
>> <[log in to unmask]
>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please find below link of video message from ICANN President,
>> Fadi
>>>>> Chehade, following posting of the draft proposals for public
>> comment
>>>>> by the Cross Community Working Groups to Develop an IANA
>> Stewardship
>>>>> Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-
>> Stewardship) &
>>>>> on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Video link:
>>>>> 
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMusmAcQpu0&feature=youtu.
>> be
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>> --
>>>>> 
>>>>> Maryam Bakoshi
>>>>> 
>>>>> Secretariat ­Support - NCSG, NCUC, NPOC
>>>>> 
>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Email:  [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mobile:  +44 7737 698036
>>>>> 
>>>>> Skype:  maryam.bakoshi.icann
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> http://www.avast.com