Hi Sean --
Welcome to the Briar Patch;-).
I assume you asked Mr. McGregor to throw you in;-)...
>From your message Sat, 06 Feb 1999 18:40:32 -0800 (PST):
}
}(Deep breath)....
}
}Greetings all. I'm with Alexander Ogilvy and am working on the ICANN
}account.
}
}The perspectives below nicely sum up the realities of our engagement.
}And, yes it's true, most non-profits, NGOs and even govt. agencies
}employ communications firms to assist them.
}
I think it is fair to say that this aspect of hiring a PR agency is
not what the comunity is reacting to. We do not begrudge ICANN the
right or privilege of contracting for support to get its work done.
What is setting us off is what might be called our worst nightmare;
That now we are gong to be subjected to more professionally crqafted
attacks in the press, while ICANN continues to be a closed
unaccountable force that is working to take control of resources adn
policy that a very large population of stakeholeders in the Internet
consider to be the source of their life blood.
We have been waging a strenuous battle to get ICANN to open up its
meetings and to inform us about what they are doing, and how that came
to be, and where they get their funding, and how the make there
decisions, and we have gotten now where so far.
But, we are now faced with a serious effort to put a better face on
what ICANN has decided and will decide in its closed processes. This
does not look like a mvoe in the right direction.
So, the fear is not that your PR agency is either incompetent or
dishonest or malevolent. Our fear is that you will in fact do a great
job of making ICANN look good regardless of how much they remain
closed and unaccountable.
}
}I'm weighing in here not to defend my firm, ICANN or my fellow
}communications professionals. Instead, I'm interested in constructive
}suggestions on how we can best communicate to the various audiences
}interested in ICANN.
}
So, your firm is nto what is under attack! It is your lcient, ICANN,
that is under attack, and it is critical to both your success and your
integrity that you fully understand the mess that you are stepping
into. So, we are here to baptize you properly;-)...
}
}I know that some will say that no amount of PR could help ICANN if
}deliberative meetings aren't completely open.
}
"Completely" is your word, not ours. Dave Faber's very rational
proposal was that ICANN should use the same open meeting rules tha the
US President's PITAC (I forget the acronym) uses. Dave can provide
you with the details. They are not onerous and do not call for
"complete" openness by any means.
We (out here in the net) noticed that the US Govt WHITE paper and the
DOC MoU under which ICANN is cooperating with the US Govt called fro
bottom up and open process decison making on the part of ICANN, but we
do not see much sign of it.
So, show us some signs of the real thing. Do not provide us with
smooth talking explanations of whay OPEN is a BAD IDEA!
}
}Fine, but lets take it a few notches down for now. My questions:
}
}**Are there other orgs that you think do a great job communicating to
}interested parties that we should investigate and borrow ideas from?
}
The PITAC has been singled out for special mention.
The FCC works under open process rules.
Most Cities and Counties and States in the US operate in the open.
Why is this so hard to grasp?
}
}**What media sources do you trust as credible providers of info on
}ICANN and Internet policy?
}
Straight talk on the net, with timely minutes of meetings and complete
disclosure of BooD member's (potential and real) conflcits of
interest. Just publish it on web pages and let the press pick it up
from there. Tell us first, instead of waiting till one of us finds it
in the press and violates copyright to spread it across the net.
And, remember, in the net, we all have a microphone too, like the one
I am using here, to ask questions in public and to challenge decisions
and call out problems, etc, et al... You cannot just publish stuff
knowing that we cannot do anything about it.
And, when engaging in discussion on the net, do not somehow make every
response read like an attempt to shut down the discussion.
Ask Esther for the complete collection of all her mail to the net and
read it all for tone and read it between the lines and ask yourself if
you think she is genuainely interested in the discussion, or just
trying to shut it down as soon as possible? This is my hypthesis, and
if in your judgement, after researching them all, you find that I am
off base, please inform me and the rest of the net of your evaluation.
}
}**I understand the one-to-one value of listservs, but given limited
}time and manpower, how do you suggest we maximize mailing lists? I
}don't want to get drawn into endless debates that spiral down into
}name-calling, but I also don't want to dismiss an opportunity to use
}an effective tool to communicate to some of the smartest people in
}this realm.
}
As that old saying goes, "We never have time or mony to do it right
the first time, but we always have the time and money to do it over!"
You are saying that in the interests of efficiency, it is important to
set aside fairness and due diligence with regard to researching the
issues, because we do not have time to do things right.
Well, let me point out that a lot of people have been forecasting doom
for the Internet if these issues are not solved "real soon now", but
this war has been going on, over the net, for about 3 years now, and
the net has not faltered in any way because of the delays, and in
fact, the net works so well that we have not missed a beat in the war!
In short, there is no time based crisis on which to justify haste at
the sacrifice of due dilignece of fair treatment of all stakeholders.
So, we see no way to let this argument win the day!
}
}**What would you like to see on ICANN's Web site?
}
1. The open truth!
2. Real BoD minutes that say something useful within 2 "Internet
days". Three regular weeks is about 12 meeks in Internet time!
Have you read all the published minutes that ICANN has published?
If you were a stakeholder in their path, would you sleep well at
night? It is like trying to sleep with an Elephant. It may or
may not be malevalent, but it is really hard to get any sleep!
3. Advanced notice of issues on the BoD agenda so we can comment on
them before they are cast in concrete.
4. An public archive of EMail questions asked in public and the
answers provided by ICANN.
5. And, publish your press releases on your web site before you ship
them to the news media! Let the news media get them the same way
and at the same time that we get them!
6. Disclosure of all conflict of interest information on all ICANN
BoD Members and Officers.
7. Disclosure of the ICANN Business Model and intended funding
sources.
8. Disclosure of how the BoD was appointed and by whom? (This is a
long standing bone of contention which stems from its virgin birth
by an unknown Godhead, to quote Jock Gill. (Jock is in the CC).
9. Disclosure of ICANN funding sources (an indicator of who ZICANNis
beholden to) and what relatinships exit beween ICANN funding
sources and Bod Mambers and Officers of ICANN.
In short, all the kinds of things that wodul be disclosed by a
non-profit organization that aspires to control the policies of the
Internet Addresses, Names, and Numbers upon which the entire Intrernet
depends as stakeholders.
Actually, I am quite surprised that you need to ask for a lis tof such
opvious stuff. But, since you ask it is fair on our part to provide a
simple and diect answer.
I will let the rest of the net give you additional ideas for what they
want to know. But I think this is a good start;-)...
}
}Again, thank you very much for any constructive advice offered.
}
You are most welcome! And THANKS FOR ASKING;-)...
By The Way -- I hope you can see that I am actually on your side, if
not on the ICANN BoD's side in this mess;-)... If I was not on your
side, I would simply not both to answer.
You can correctly interpret this a a vote of no confidence in the
ICANN BoD, based on their lack of appreciation of the absolute
requirement that they hold open BoD meetings, whether they like it or
not. What they like is not an issue of any consequence, since it our
stake in the Internet that they are messing with!
If the ICANN BoD cannot open up their meetings for personal reasons
for preferring closed meetings, they should forthwith resign, or open
up their meetings. Either one will make me happy.
Cheers;-)...\Stef
PS: I propose that ICANN adopt the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailing list as its
Mailing List Of Record for discussion of ICANN related issues,
where you will publish all press releases first (while also
mounting them on your web site). This list is currently
administered by Richard Sexton of ORSC on behalf of IFWP (God Rest
Its Soul). It has no other specific use at present, but most
everyone who cares about this mess is a subscriber, and it can
handle all the rest who want to subscribe...\s
}
}Also please feel free to contact me or my colleagues at this address
}now and in the future. We set up this account merely in an attempt to
}manage our already overloaded inboxes.
}
}However, if you feel your not getting a proper response, please
}contact me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
}
}Best Regards, Sean Garrett
}
}---Dave Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:---
}>
}>Gordon,
}>
}>There is another view on the engagement of Ogilvy by ICANN. It is very
}>common for not for profits to be helped by PR firms for payment that
}>covers basically out of pocket expenses. I would assume that is the
}>case with ICANN. PR firms offer a lot of services NOT JUST spin
}>doctoring things. They often are very good at making sure the public
}>knows what is going on via press releases and briefings. Often NFP do
}>not have the staff with the time and energy to make sure that happens.
}>
}>I for one will give both Ogilbvy and ICANN the benefit of the doubt
}>and believe that they are in fact doing this to improve the
}>communications to the community and not to hide anything.
}>
}>I further assume that the ICANN Board and President will firmly insure
}>that there is no spin control on what comes out and that they tell the
}>whole truth and nothing but the truth.
}>
}>Esther, do you agree.
}>
}>Dave
}>
}__
}http://www.go.com
