[DISCUSSION] How to Proceed with Media?

[Deadeye Jack]

Alright so I think how we approach writing a piece of legislation we have to ask a question and then some sub questions.

Question 1: Does the solution we write now assume that we ever want to assign an elected Officer a Media Portfolio again?

If Yes: Then the legislation we write should focus on the process of holding a snap selection/election of some kind of [Insert name for Media Chief here]. It could include a line such as "In the event that the Delegate does not assign an Officer to the Media portfolio [insert name for Media Chief here] is (s)elected by [whatever way].

If No: Then the legislation we write should establish a long serving [insert name for Media Chief here] position that is selected/elected that has the authority and trust to run the operations that the Media Officer has done in the past.

Question 2: How do we select/elect an [insert name for Media Chief here]? There are a few options all of which may not be listed here and which can have minor variations.

Option 1: The Delegate appoints the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 2: The Delegate appoints the [insert name for Media Chief here] and the Assembly confirms
Option 3: The Assembly holds an election open to all citizens for the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 4: The Assembly holds an election open to all TRRMC Staff for the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 5: The Assembly holds an election open to some TRRMC Staff for the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 6: TRRMC staff select someone to [insert name for Media Chief here] and the Assembly confirms
Option 7: TRRMC staff select someone to [insert name for Media Chief here] and tells the citizens of TRR thanks but no thanks.

For the record I'd probably fall somewhere along the spectrum of either

Q1: No Q2: Option 3,4 or 5

or

Q2: Yes Q2: Option 1, 2, 4, 5, or maybe 6

[Spartan Termopylae]

In the absence of media as an officer role, it should be delegated as a subcategory to one of the other departments for the duration. Then said officer could assign a deputy, perhaps from within the previous media department, to run things until the next administration. Then there is no need for any legislation, and it is, in fact, what we actually do with other departments. They are subsumed by other departments until we need them again. Webby treat media as something special?

[Fauxia]

Question 1 confuses me

[Deadeye Jack]

Question 1 confuses me

Well for example right now we don't have a Media Officer, hence the current discussion. So do we imagine a scenario where this is basically just the circumstances of who was elected Officer and maybe next time we'll have someone suitable for assigning as a dedicated Media Officer who would resume running the media operation as it has always been? Or do we want to permanently setup another way to decide who leads the media operation?

[The Pharcyde]

Alright so I think how we approach writing a piece of legislation we have to ask a question and then some sub questions.

Question 1: Does the solution we write now assume that we ever want to assign an elected Officer a Media Portfolio again?

If Yes: Then the legislation we write should focus on the process of holding a snap selection/election of some kind of [Insert name for Media Chief here]. It could include a line such as "In the event that the Delegate does not assign an Officer to the Media portfolio [insert name for Media Chief here] is (s)elected by [whatever way].

If No: Then the legislation we write should establish a long serving [insert name for Media Chief here] position that is selected/elected that has the authority and trust to run the operations that the Media Officer has done in the past.

Question 2: How do we select/elect an [insert name for Media Chief here]? There are a few options all of which may not be listed here and which can have minor variations.

Option 1: The Delegate appoints the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 2: The Delegate appoints the [insert name for Media Chief here] and the Assembly confirms
Option 3: The Assembly holds an election open to all citizens for the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 4: The Assembly holds an election open to all TRRMC Staff for the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 5: The Assembly holds an election open to some TRRMC Staff for the [insert name for Media Chief here]
Option 6: TRRMC staff select someone to [insert name for Media Chief here] and the Assembly confirms
Option 7: TRRMC staff select someone to [insert name for Media Chief here] and tells the citizens of TRR thanks but no thanks.

For the record I'd probably fall somewhere along the spectrum of either

Q1: No Q2: Option 3,4 or 5

or

Q2: Yes Q2: Option 1, 2, 4, 5, or maybe 6

Q1: No
Q2: Option 3

Media experience in TRT should be a selling point in a campaign, not a barrier to entry. If we vote for someone who isn't in TRT over someone who is, there's probably a good reason for it. Hopefully the winner in that scenario would be allowed to run.

I think EiC should be elected and then allowed to hold the position until they resign and appoint a replacement. A good balance is struck in giving the assembly power to recall a problematic EiC (as a condition for TRT being able to call itself "The Rejected Times"), but otherwise letting TRT run on its own.

[thechurchofsatan]

Not having a position mentioned anywhere on the constitution, or anywhere in any legislation what-so-ever, doesn't preclude it from being elected by the assembly, or the TRT staff, nor does it make either option less or more legitimate.

TRT is not answerable to just it's staff or contributors. It's answerable to the whole region. Having a permanent Media Officer always be elected along with the rest of the officers, ( 3 or 4 ), would effectively be the same thing as having the assembly elect an editor in chief ( in the lack of a media officer ) so at this point we're just arguing names. Unless you'd oppose electing anyone to overview the rejected times. :^)

The two positions are distinctly and purposely separate. I'm opposed to any governmental body unilaterally deciding who the head of TRT is while it no longer falls under the purview of any of its offices. At this time it's only right and fair that the staff of TRT be allowed to elect its own leader.

[Deadeye Jack]

Not having a position mentioned anywhere on the constitution, or anywhere in any legislation what-so-ever, doesn't preclude it from being elected by the assembly, or the TRT staff, nor does it make either option less or more legitimate.

TRT is not answerable to just it's staff or contributors. It's answerable to the whole region. Having a permanent Media Officer always be elected along with the rest of the officers, ( 3 or 4 ), would effectively be the same thing as having the assembly elect an editor in chief ( in the lack of a media officer ) so at this point we're just arguing names. Unless you'd oppose electing anyone to overview the rejected times. :^)

The two positions are distinctly and purposely separate. I'm opposed to any governmental body unilaterally deciding who the head of TRT is while it no longer falls under the purview of any of its offices. At this time it's only right and fair that the staff of TRT be allowed to elect its own leader.

So in the future a Media Officer can be assigned and then TRT will immediately go back to the prior arrangement of being entirely subjugated by the Media Officer as it has been?

[Spartan Termopylae]

But if the trt is part of the media department, should it not be subjugated to the officer in charge of media? You make it sound like you want it to be a fully independent entity. If that were to be the case, aby connections to this region would need to be stripped. It cannot show any official imagery relating to the region. Anything that connects it to the region would need to be stripped. It could no longer claim to be the voice of the region

As long as it claims to be an institution of this region, this region needs to run it. That means it needs an official government representative of some sort

[Deadeye Jack]

But if the trt is part of the media department, should it not be subjugated to the officer in charge of media? You make it sound like you want it to be a fully independent entity. If that were to be the case, aby connections to this region would need to be stripped. It cannot show any official imagery relating to the region. Anything that connects it to the region would need to be stripped. It could no longer claim to be the voice of the region

As long as it claims to be an institution of this region, this region needs to run it. That means it needs an official government representative of some sort

Nope that's not my position at all. I believe in Media's accountability to the region and its citizenry as it has always been. I think there are different ways we could achieve that which is what we're discussing now. My previous post was merely pointing out that the arrangement of a government body choosing who the head of TRT is has already been in existence for years and that if he means what he says, he's perfectly fine with the amount of power the Media Officer has had in the past. Which means he believes that if at any time in the future a Media Officer is assigned, he is perfectly fine with the Media Officer deposing any potential TRT staff elected representative and having final say on operations. Which makes me wonder why he is opposed to having a specifically elected head of media by the assembly since we might stop calling it the Media Officer

[Spartan Termopylae]

A simpler answer would be as per my suggestion. Temporarily move it into another department. Then it's up to that officer top decide how to run it, if via deputies or directly, until such a tone as we have a media officer again. Make it an ad hoc sub department, for the short term, and there is no need for legislation or more elections.

I apologise for misreading your intent. There appears to be a strong independence bent from the trt on here, obviously read it wrong on account of it

[thechurchofsatan]

But if the trt is part of the media department, should it not be subjugated to the officer in charge of media?

As long as it claims to be an institution of this region, this region needs to run it. That means it needs an official government representative of some sort

Since there's no Media Officer, the media department doesn't exist right now. It's like Schrodinger's Cat except with a department.

Also, the government is not the region. The region is more than just its government and the government cannot claim otherwise. The region is the people that compose its community.

But if the trt is part of the media department, should it not be subjugated to the officer in charge of media? You make it sound like you want it to be a fully independent entity. If that were to be the case, aby connections to this region would need to be stripped. It cannot show any official imagery relating to the region. Anything that connects it to the region would need to be stripped. It could no longer claim to be the voice of the region

As long as it claims to be an institution of this region, this region needs to run it. That means it needs an official government representative of some sort

Nope that's not my position at all. I believe in Media's accountability to the region and its citizenry as it has always been. I think there are different ways we could achieve that which is what we're discussing now. My previous post was merely pointing out that the arrangement of a government body choosing who the head of TRT is has already been in existence for years and that if he means what he says, he's perfectly fine with the amount of power the Media Officer has had in the past. Which means he believes that if at any time in the future a Media Officer is assigned, he is perfectly fine with the Media Officer deposing any potential TRT staff elected representative and having final say on operations. Which makes me wonder why he is opposed to having a specifically elected head of media by the assembly since we might stop calling it the Media Officer

And the Media Department, were it in operation now would apply to this situation. But since there is no Media Department right now, it doesn't. I'm not anti-accountability. In fact I literally hold accountability in a religious regard. It's just that with the lack of a media department right now, TRT should be able to decide its own leader amongst itself. An election held within TRT itself is the fairest manner to do so. After all, the staff members do all the work in TRT. Most citizens do nothing in or for TRT so it's incredibly unfair for people who don't even participate to decide who should run it. They have no commitment to TRT nor does it bear any importance to them.

[Guy]

That Jack didn't appoint a Media Officer doesn't mean that we're not supposed to have a regional discussion on how we should govern our regional publication. As our pre-eminent regional publication, I think there should be broad agreement across the region on that.

From a governance perspective, I think that passing a law would actually be best-practice. The alternative is that it continues existing out of the Executive, which means Jack assigns the role to someone.

1. This Act is The Rejected Times Act.

2. The Rejected Times, as in existence prior to this Act, continues to be constituted in accordance with this Act.

3. The Rejected Times' mission is to report on events occurring in the Rejected Realms and outside it that are relevant to the NationStates community, and in particular to the Gameplay community, and to provide a range of views about those events.

4. The Rejected Times is published by the Rejected Realms, through its government.

5. The Rejected Times is to be edited by an editor-in-chief.

6. The editor-in-chief has primary responsibility to select the content for The Rejected Times and to ensure its factual accuracy in a manner consistent with its mission.

7. The editor-in-chief is elected ...

[Spartan Termopylae]

We don't need top legislature this. All we need to do is put it under the authority of another department until such time as wr have media back, otherwise we'd need to legislate every single time a department fell into temporary abeyance, which would also mean repealing said legislation when the situation changes.

We could just save ourselves time and effort by putting media into another department until they are given their own ministry once more

[thechurchofsatan]

If TRT were to continue to have a place in the executive of the government, it would require a dedicated officer due to the vast amount of work it entails. TRT isn't a lazy side project that another officer can just occasionally look at while they focus on another department. And again, I will not settle for anything less than constitutional protection from dissolution by the government.

[Gorundu]

Should there be a clause guaranteeing editorial independence from the government, Guy?

[Spartan Termopylae]

Who is taking dissolution? What I am suggesting is give it to another department in the short term. That officer can then appoint a deputy whose sole responsibility is media. I don't know why you seem to think media is something special that deserves rights other departments don't have, because it isn't. Consecutive media officers have seen the trt as the prime responsibility of the department, and it may be, but not to the detriment of all else. One while department for a small news outlet? If it is so important, when was the last issue? The latest I can see was archived 3 months ago. Just what is it actually doing at the moment? If it takes an entire term to produce one issue, what is the point of an entire department for its sole existence?

Based on that performance, I'm rather close to calling for media to be disbanded completely and it's responsibilities split between the other departments

[Spartan Termopylae]

Should there be a clause guaranteeing editorial independence from the government, Guy?

Why put a clause in something that says that a government run paper is free from government editorial rules?

[Deadeye Jack]

If TRT were to continue to have a place in the executive of the government, it would require a dedicated officer due to the vast amount of work it entails. TRT isn't a lazy side project that another officer can just occasionally look at while they focus on another department.

To be honest this is potentially what we're looking at without the couple hardliners compromising at all. As I've said numerous times my exact intention is to expand a current officer's role to include Media as well, if we don't come to an amicable resolution in a somewhat timely manner. In the meantime, I had begun planning for the next issue of TRT as a temporary head of the Media Department.

[The Aligned People]

If it is so important, when was the last issue?

March -- last month: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... #p36808581

The latest I can see was archived 3 months ago.

Yep, archived. That's not the same as being published.

Just what is it actually doing at the moment?

Well, Jack opened up a new drafting thread for the next issue. Multiple staff members have come up with many ideas to write about in the thread with regard to what there is going on currently in NationStates and TRR. Frankly, TRT is doing its job at the moment just as it always has when we've begun drafting for a new Issue. Oh, and you can't forget about how we're currently dealing with there being no Media Officer -- so there seems to be a lot on the plate.

To be honest this is potentially what we're looking at without the couple hardliners compromising at all. As I've said numerous times my exact intention is to expand a current officer's role to include Media as well, if we don't come to an amicable resolution in a somewhat timely manner. In the meantime, I had begun planning for the next issue of TRT as a temporary head of the Media Department.

At this point, I think this would be a good short term solution unless you intend to continue to keep things running by opening threads in the Newsroom forum. Which, again, I don't think it would be a bad short term solution. Anyone with past experience in doing so would be able to edit any articles so they are good to go into each of the formats (forum, GP, dispatch). I still think an amendment would be the best long term solution to make 5 Officer seats (although I know that is highly unlikely) because I don't see the WA going away any time soon, and Bormiar seems to be building the department up by developing a staff, so if this trend sticks I think it's reasonable to assume that we will see a WA Officer become more permanent. As an amendment is unlikely, I think one of Jack's proposed solutions is the next best thing: TRT Staff nominating someone to be the "Media Chief" and then confirmed by the Assembly. At this point, I'm tired of hearing arguments form because of the name of the proposed leader of TRT. I'm not saying Media Chief should be it, that's just an example. Some Staff are adamant about keeping the title Editor-in-Chief under staff control, so it should stay that way because a title is just such a small component to all of this that shouldn't cause as much of a qualm as it has.

[Spartan Termopylae]

If it is so important, when was the last issue?

March -- last month: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... #p36808581

The latest I can see was archived 3 months ago.

Yep, archived. That's not the same as being published.

Just what is it actually doing at the moment?

Well, Jack opened up a new drafting thread for the next issue. Multiple staff members have come up with many ideas to write about in the thread with regard to what there is going on currently in NationStates and TRR. Frankly, TRT is doing its job at the moment just as it always has when we've begun drafting for a new Issue. Oh, and you can't forget about how we're currently dealing with there being no Media Officer -- so there seems to be a lot on the plate.

To be honest this is potentially what we're looking at without the couple hardliners compromising at all. As I've said numerous times my exact intention is to expand a current officer's role to include Media as well, if we don't come to an amicable resolution in a somewhat timely manner. In the meantime, I had begun planning for the next issue of TRT as a temporary head of the Media Department.

At this point, I think this would be a good short term solution unless you intend to continue to keep things running by opening threads in the Newsroom forum. Which, again, I don't think it would be a bad short term solution. Anyone with past experience in doing so would be able to edit any articles so they are good to go into each of the formats (forum, GP, dispatch). I still think an amendment would be the best long term solution to make 5 Officer seats (although I know that is highly unlikely) because I don't see the WA going away any time soon, and Bormiar seems to be building the department up by developing a staff, so if this trend sticks I think it's reasonable to assume that we will see a WA Officer become more permanent. As an amendment is unlikely, I think one of Jack's proposed solutions is the next best thing: TRT Staff nominating someone to be the "Media Chief" and then confirmed by the Assembly. At this point, I'm tired of hearing arguments form because of the name of the proposed leader of TRT. I'm not saying Media Chief should be it, that's just an example. Some Staff are adamant about keeping the title Editor-in-Chief under staff control, so it should stay that way because a title is just such a small component to all of this that shouldn't cause as much of a qualm as it has.

So issues aren't regularly posted in the forum here for that express purpose? Three months worth of issues aren't available here?

Trt is doing its job ad if nothing has changed? Sp it doesn't need its own department and can be subordinated to another department if needs be.

We don't need 5 officers. Just putting it into another department with a special deputy with responsibility for it should do the job until and unless the delegate feels media needs to be brought back.

[Cove]

To be honest this is potentially what we're looking at without the couple hardliners compromising at all. As I've said numerous times my exact intention is to expand a current officer's role to include Media as well, if we don't come to an amicable resolution in a somewhat timely manner. In the meantime, I had begun planning for the next issue of TRT as a temporary head of the Media Department.

Just going back to this Jack, Would you say that having the delegate in effect lead the Media department would be something that is feasible? I’m just from my perspective trying to understand in practice how the Officers would function around the ‘media issue’ so to speak, as I think the last thing any of want of course is for one area to get less attention cause of a dual focus with media if that makes sense?

To go back to the issue, I’m very keen to give attention to Guy’s legislative proposal, as in my view if we are going to go with the EIC route, that Guy’s legislation gives us a good basis to begin with.

[Gorundu]

Should there be a clause guaranteeing editorial independence from the government, Guy?

Why put a clause in something that says that a government run paper is free from government editorial rules?

Because that has been the case since the beginning of TRT?

[Deadeye Jack]

To be honest this is potentially what we're looking at without the couple hardliners compromising at all. As I've said numerous times my exact intention is to expand a current officer's role to include Media as well, if we don't come to an amicable resolution in a somewhat timely manner. In the meantime, I had begun planning for the next issue of TRT as a temporary head of the Media Department.

Just going back to this Jack, Would you say that having the delegate in effect lead the Media department would be something that is feasible? I’m just from my perspective trying to understand in practice how the Officers would function around the ‘media issue’ so to speak, as I think the last thing any of want of course is for one area to get less attention cause of a dual focus with media if that makes sense?

It wouldn't be my preference long term because I need to give my attention to all executive functions but I suppose it's feasible. But I don't think it's any more feasible or preferable than expanding an Officer's portfolio to include Media and then having them either run it or appoint a Deputy to run it in their stead. Our World Assembly program has been part of outreach for months and we've had a dedicated Deputy to basically autonomously run things. Which is what I expect would happen in this scenario as well. The question is, would people rather have a government official who is elected heading media, or a government official who is not elected heading media.

Pursuing something like Guy, I, or others have said would still allow for the citizenry to have a say in who heads media at all times

[thechurchofsatan]

For the record, because I know I'm one such person you're referring to, Jack, how am I not being open to compromise? I have actively been pursuing a compromise.

While some are quick to say that TRT would die without the government, I wonder if the government is confident enough to test that theory in a wager (with fair terms) which would decide how we all proceed with this? Because talk is cheap. And lying through your teeth is worthless.

[Spartan Termopylae]

Who said it would die? I think I missed that one