W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > May 2012

Media Access (ACTION-197)

From: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:59:57 -0700
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Message-ID: <8C52FFBAA15F44788C1CFF02871A2A5A@gmail.com>
I was tasked on today's call with thinking through alternative media access policies.  Here's a rough outline of design points:
Are media allowed to listen to calls and meetings?
If yes, may they reference their first-hand experience in their reporting?  (If not, they'll have to cite our oh-so-reliable minutes and second-hand descriptions.)
If yes, what degree of first-hand reporting will be permissible?
Quotation
Direct quotes (e.g. "I want a lunch break")
Paraphrasing (e.g. noted that he wanted a lunch break)
Collective sentiment (e.g. several wanted to break for lunch)

Attribution
Identification (e.g. Jonathan Mayer from Stanford said)
Background (e.g. a researcher said)
None (e.g. a participant in the working group said)

Impressions (e.g. he looked hungry)
Procedure (e.g. there was a vote to break for lunch)
Conduct (e.g. he left to get lunch)

Will we provide media briefings?


In selecting which policy we adopt, we have to weigh the concerns of certain industry participants—erroneously negative publicity, corporate media policy, and the attendant chilling effects of both—against the importance of transparency in this process.  Given the broad spectrum of design points, there seems to me a lot of scope for compromise.

Jonathan
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 03:16:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:28 UTC