St. Lukes Hospital Protest Ad

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

leninbenjamin

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

boards is a privately owned and run operation... the admins can do whatever they like.

Vexorg

Boards only has one chosen campaign currently "Santa Strike Force", we can give up some space to other campaigns and until they start to become problematic, & hopefully they wont, we can support a number of campaigns.

I would not say we are getting into the business of choosing a cause, we have been asked to make announcements many times for what a user describes as a good cause, as announcements can be overwritten, I have offered higher visibility via a banner, no one has taken us up on the offer of a banner until now.

If it is something the becomes more frequent, I would like the community to decide what campaigns are run. Right now we are just testing the water.

Do you see any downside or potential issue?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sully

To be fair this is something completely different to a law on driving licenses.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sully

Well thats because everybody drives pretty much. Not everybody has cancer and there is a far lower amount of people who are pushed about the closure of a hospital. I can see where your coming from, but this is more advertising an event but I believe the last one was arranging an event within boards (which isnt needed now anyway)

Boston

I think this is an absolutely huge issue for boards.ie and I'm pretty amazed how mute the discussion has been on it. This is boards first venture in becoming a political machine. So many things in the past have just dynamically grown to become a part of boards without any plain. I really thing someone needs to sit down and think out the long term implications of this one, and always be mindful that just because you can't see a negative side to something, doesn't mean their isn't one.

leninbenjamin

Boston wrote: »

I really thing someone needs to sit down and think out the long term implications of this one, and always be mindful that just because you can't see a negative side to something, doesn't mean their isn't one.

that's such a pessimistic attitude though. I mean you could put forward that argument in relation to anything, and ultimately if you adhere to it you'll never make progress...

Boston

Its realistic. There are negatives to everything in life.

leninbenjamin

Boston wrote: »

Its realistic. There are negatives to everything in life.

I know. but still... there's a chance i'll slip on the pavement and break my neck by landing awkwardly but it doesn't stop me from going outside. You can't quantify the negatives, you can't say they'll necessarily have more weight than the positives, indeed the only way you can is by trial and error frankly, theorizing will only get you so far on an issue. I don't see anything wrong with boards giving it's weight, albeit tentatively and selectively to certain issues, yes it might alienate some but that doesn't necessarily mean it's existence as an institution will be threatened or altered dramatically. the admins aren't going to start preaching fundamentalist dogma all of a sudden now are they?

Boston

So eyes closed and hope for the best? What ever way you cut it, this is a shift in what boards.ie is about. Now that may be a good thing, it may be a bad thing, but its no small thing.

leninbenjamin

Boston wrote: »

So eyes closed and hope for the best?

have you devised some mathematical model that will allow us to evaluate fully the potential outcomes of any actions taken then?

people are reactionary by nature. if this is a course of action the admins wish to take they aren't going to be able to determine the attitudes of boardsies to anything until that strategy has been chosen. they might be able to garner some insight from some, but they certainly won't be able to plan for the possible outcomes of any action based on reason and discussion alone.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sully

Well, its a tough one. This is a lot more serious then a driving license law. Its not a "Boards Event" its more advertised on Boards.

I do agree it needs a proper discussion to rule in & out what can and cant be said etc..

homah_7ft

Could someone post up what is being discussed here?

Boston

leninbenjamin wrote: »

have you devised some mathematical model that will allow us to evaluate fully the potential outcomes of any actions taken then?

people are reactionary by nature. if this is a course of action the admins wish to take they aren't going to be able to determine the attitudes of boardsies to anything until that strategy has been chosen. they might be able to garner some insight from some, but they certainly won't be able to plan for the possible outcomes of any action based on reason and discussion alone.

Listen, we have brains in our heads so me can evaluate the likely outcomes of our actions. Just because you can't predict with absolute certainty the outcome of an event, doesn't mean you can't have a fair stab at it based on past experience. Its call learning from ones mistakes. This is a discussion forum, why are you so afraid of discussion.

Vexorg

Would you categorise IOFFL as political?

I do not see this as a political statement, and if it was a political statement how does it differ from boards allowing and promoting IOFFL and Digital Rights Ireland among other things?

I currently cannot see a downside to allow a group to draw attention to something like this, but but would listen to a compelling argument.

V.

Sully

homah_7ft wrote: »

Could someone post up what is being discussed here?

There is an add running on boards about the closer of a cancer hospital, and a protest has been organised. A previous request was made in the mod forum around the time of the new driving licence laws, they wanted to organize a protest through boards (IIRC) and it was heavily rejected.

So.. Dave is asking pretty much whats the difference, and should such political stuff be run here.

padser

It seems to me that there are two questions.

1) Is Should boards be involved in political events
2) Is this a political event

From a personal point of view point 1 is easier to answer. To echo what DaveIrl has already said I would currently view boards as a community without political affiliations. Obviously the admins can choose what direction they want the site in, but if they do begin to allow political activism then boards is unlikely to remain a cross section (if an internet community ever is a cross section) of Irish society.

If we agree that political activism is not something we want on boards then we move onto the second question - is this a political event?

It's certainly boarderline. It's not about 'saving a hospital' per say - the government is trying to reform cancer treatment in Ireland. Whether you agree or disagree with them is IMO a political opinion.

If you agree to advertise this event will you advetise in the same way a Fine Fail election event before the next election? If so, will you do something similar for Sinn Fein? I assume the only practical way to regulate it would be for the admins to decide which they will advertise (as you can't advertise everything) - or to delagate the decision to Mods etc. Either way once you start making decisions about what to advertise boards has become a politicised IMO.

So (in my opinion at any rate) if you decide you don't want to turn boards into a somewhat politicised website you need to refuse to advertise anything political - (or at least charge normal rates for the advertisement).

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

not wanted to ignite a debate on the issue - but there is the problem that there are too many cancer care hospitals in the country, and none of them having sufficient expertise. The logical thing is to close down some hospital's cancer-care facilities in order to make the rest of the hospitals have a concentration of expertise.

Boston

Vexorg wrote: »

Would you categorise IOFFL as political?

I do not see this as a political statement, and if it was a political statement how does it differ from boards allowing and promoting IOFFL and Digital Rights Ireland among other things?

I always associated anything under hosting as being some separate from boards.ie. More kinda like something being facilitated by boards rather then support. But you make a good point about IOFFL, I guess to a degree boards.ie has been always political in that it facilitated campaigns. And one can use boards as a platform to promote a campaign I even see it over on the airsoft forum. I difference I see now is moving from a passive role to an active role. By advertising campaigns and actively plugging them, boards is driving the issues forward as oppose to just letting it happen. Keep in mind that I'm not necessarily saying this is a bad thing.

I currently cannot see a downside to allow a group to draw attention to something like this, but but would listen to a compelling argument.

V.

The main thing which makes me apprehensive is that campaigns like the saint lukes one are regularly hi-jacked by others to their own ends. The majority in my view end up being associated with some political grouping and person. That for me is the danger, that people will begin to see this as something which can be manipulated. For example allot Gay-rights campaigns end up being used by people with agendas for their own means. I really wouldn't like to see boards.ie being used by some TD or political group as a means to get more votes. I kinda associate that with shilling.

Roundtower2: This is not a thread about the campaign. If you want one start it else where.

DeVore

This is a topic the admins are discussing and its an important one. None of us are sure where the line is drawn but we are all sure of one thing, Boards is a platform for discussion and we wont back away from hosting things like IOFFL etc.

We'll come to a general consensus but the input here is being read with interest too...

DeV.

nesf

DeVore wrote: »

This is a topic the admins are discussing and its an important one. None of us are sure where the line is drawn but we are all sure of one thing, Boards is a platform for discussion and we wont back away from hosting things like IOFFL etc.

We'll come to a general consensus but the input here is being read with interest too...

DeV.

There's a world of difference between IOFFL and campaigns about cancer care/hospital closures. The latter ones are divisive and far more bitterly fought. You can either pick a side or try and stay neutral wrt to politics in the broader sense. The problem with moving from a discussion platform (ie threads in Politics/Humanities/AH etc) to an activist platform (ie advertising protests), is that you risk alienating people. Especially people who don't agree with the political slant of the campaigns chosen (and it is honestly impossible to pick "worthy" campaigns without adopting or affecting a political slant).

There is merit to activism but with a volunteer site that has previously been relatively neutral wrt to campaigns etc it means there will be some fall out. If this site advertises/pushes a particular angle then it potentially could be something that people don't want to be associated with or seen to tacitly support in some way?

DeVore

Nesf, I think thats probably quite true.

However, a minor point (genuinely); we p1ss off some people just by *existing*. There are a number of people who have made it very clear to me that they would merrily dance on my grave. That was a personal dislike, it was just because we existed as an entity. I could name 20 companies right now that wouldnt entertain a phone call from us.

That said, I personally agree with your point of view.

DeV.

Crash&Burn

Hello people, my motive for asking Gerry to put up the banner was to make people aware of what was going on as I feel this topic has gone unnoticed.

I have been a user of boards threw the years maybe my post count might not show it but i am more of a "lurker" I am of no political agenda or member of any party. The reason why I got involved in trying to keep the hospital open is because my own mother was in this hospital and I think it will be a loss to the country not just dublin. I felt that a way to show was happening was to use boards as a outlet.

So I was not looking to drag boards in to a political debate but just to use it as a way to voice a problem that I feel is gripping our nation. I do not disagree with what any one has said here. I thought people should here from my self why I chose boards to help my cause.

Well thats my story and I hope people can respect it.

Thanks Gerry Tom regi and the rest of the lads

Ciaran

DeVore

In fairness to all concerned, I think we are (or should be!) looking at some sort of guidelines for future involvement in such things (rather then navel gazing a single instance) and teasing out the essence of why we might seem to "support" one thing and not another (eg: "supporting" IOFFL with a forum and not "supporting" a charity event by PMing all users...).

Discussion beings light (preferably) rather then heat and with that light we discover things. What we have discussed here has been of great assistance to the admins in coming to our decision about where to draw those lines...


DeV.

nesf

Crash&Burn wrote: »

Hello people, my motive for asking Gerry to put up the banner was to make people aware of what was going on as I feel this topic has gone unnoticed.

I have been a user of boards threw the years maybe my post count might not show it but i am more of a "lurker" I am of no political agenda or member of any party. The reason why I got involved in trying to keep the hospital open is because my own mother was in this hospital and I think it will be a loss to the country not just dublin. I felt that a way to show was happening was to use boards as a outlet.

So I was not looking to drag boards in to a political debate but just to use it as a way to voice a problem that I feel is gripping our nation. I do not disagree with what any one has said here. I thought people should here from my self why I chose boards to help my cause.

Well thats my story and I hope people can respect it.

Thanks Gerry Tom regi and the rest of the lads

Ciaran

The issue (for me anyway) isn't that the person asking for the banner has political motives (and I didn't mean to insinuate that you did), it's that the issue itself tends to be polarising politically. In this case, not everyone thinks that closing some hospitals is a bad idea and for some this is part of their personal politics. It's not up there with advertising pro-life or pro-choice protests but it's heading in that direction.

DeVore wrote: »

However, a minor point (genuinely); we p1ss off some people just by *existing*. There are a number of people who have made it very clear to me that they would merrily dance on my grave. That was a personal dislike, it was just because we existed as an entity. I could name 20 companies right now that wouldnt entertain a phone call from us.

But the site in itself is relatively apolitical or agnostic on many issues which is important in a general forum imho. Especially one that's as diverse as this one is.

leninbenjamin

nesf wrote: »

There is merit to activism but with a volunteer site that has previously been relatively neutral wrt to campaigns etc it means there will be some fall out. If this site advertises/pushes a particular angle then it potentially could be something that people don't want to be associated with or seen to tacitly support in some way?

I doubt boards users though are as varied in opinion as the overall population. the bulk of us come from a similar demographic after all judging by the fair splatterings of polls around the place. With that in mind i think there is the potential for a single cause to emerge in time that we could relatively safely rally around without alienating too many...

Any initiative would obviously have to come from general sentiments on boards in the first place, and not from a small group's convictions. Ultimately though you don't know what's going to be the result of your actions until you actually do it.

communities like this though tend to evolve over time anyway... perhaps steps like this are a natural course anyway.

Crash&Burn

nesf wrote: »

The issue (for me anyway) isn't that the person asking for the banner has political motives (and I didn't mean to insinuate that you did), it's that the issue itself tends to be polarising politically. In this case, not everyone thinks that closing some hospitals is a bad idea and for some this is part of their personal politics. It's not up there with advertising pro-life or pro-choice protests but it's heading in that direction.




But the site in itself is relatively apolitical or agnostic on many issues which is important in a general forum imho. Especially one that's as diverse as this one is.

No offence taken I just felt it was better to clear up what my motive was before it was taken out of context.

nesf

leninbenjamin wrote: »

I doubt boards users though are as varied in opinion as the overall population. the bulk of us come from a similar demographic after all judging by the fair splatterings of polls around the place. With that in mind i think there is the potential for a single cause to emerge in time that we could relatively safely rally around without alienating too many...

The thing is, political issues are divisive, even among relatively homogeneous groups. You're talking about a substantial switch from being apolitical to political, not a switch from being a slightly left leaning site to a moderately left leaning site etc.

WildIrishRose

St Lukes is a wonderful hospital!

tallaght01

I think roundtower2 has touched on the important issue here. The world over, in the better healthcare systems, expert care is often centralised. It means that the specialists all go to one or a small number of hospitals. The scanners are based there, and people from all over the country get the same treatment. It, in theory, eliminates "treatment by postcode".

Now, a lot of people would prefer that the services were on their doorsteps, regardless of how specialised they are.

Most people want services on their doorstep AND a specialist service. This won't happen in Ireland. However, in this case, there will still be specialist services available in Beaumont.

Therefore, the idea is to try and centralise cancer care to an extent.

This will hopefully lead to better outcomes for patients.

So, that's the opposing argument. People may take whatever side they like.Personally I think centralisation of some services is reasonable, although I'm no oncologist.

The point I'm making is that there is a reasonable argument for the closure of St. Lukes. I don't have very strong feelings either way. I'm just pointing out the fact that if boards is seen as opposing the closure, you should be aware of the reasons why you support it, and be able to provide some counter-arguments to the above.

However, is an ad the same as support, whether real or implicit? I don't know. Certanly if it got to the stage where we were saying "campaign X, supoported by boards.ie" we'd have a bigger issues to contend with.

Boston

Crash&Burn wrote: »

Hello people, my motive for asking Gerry to put up the banner was to make people aware of what was going on as I feel this topic has gone unnoticed.

I have been a user of boards threw the years maybe my post count might not show it but i am more of a "lurker" I am of no political agenda or member of any party. The reason why I got involved in trying to keep the hospital open is because my own mother was in this hospital and I think it will be a loss to the country not just dublin. I felt that a way to show was happening was to use boards as a outlet.

So I was not looking to drag boards in to a political debate but just to use it as a way to voice a problem that I feel is gripping our nation. I do not disagree with what any one has said here. I thought people should here from my self why I chose boards to help my cause.

Well thats my story and I hope people can respect it.

Thanks Gerry Tom regi and the rest of the lads

Ciaran

Political campaigns can be hi-jacked as various groupings try to score points against each other. Image that some sinn fein or swp councilor decided to try and use this for political gain, that would probably disenfranchise allot of people from boards itself by association.

regi

WildIrishRose & Tallaght01, this isn't a thread to discuss the merits of closing down the hospitals.

tallaght01

I think you've missed the point, regi. I don't even work in Ireland, and amn't really bothered either way.

I was highlighting the fact that the closure is part of a wider strategy of centralisation of specialist services, that's the gold standard internationally.

Therefore, IF boards is supporting the protest against closure then you guys should be aware that it's not an issue of cutbacks etc and should have a good reason why you don't think it's a good idea.

Vexorg

In this instance Boards was not supporting the cause, the intention was to highlight a request by a boards.ie user for an apparent good cause.

No consideration was given to the political ramifications of the request and indeed at the time none were seen, very few have felt strongly enough to comment - except by a handful of posters on this thread. The banner was pulled on the 8th btw, as the admins were discussing it also.


V.

Blowfish

tallaght01 wrote: »

I think you've missed the point, regi. I don't even work in Ireland, and amn't really bothered either way.

I was highlighting the fact that the closure is part of a wider strategy of centralisation of specialist services, that's the gold standard internationally.

Therefore, IF boards is supporting the protest against closure then you guys should be aware that it's not an issue of cutbacks etc and should have a good reason why you don't think it's a good idea.

Yes, but in this case (and this may sound strange), the particular cause is irrelevant, if it wasn't this one it would be another one. It's about whether or not advertising certain causes (regardless of what they actually are) would put boards in a situation where it is no longer apolitical.

Boston

Vexorg wrote: »

In this instance Boards was not supporting the cause, the intention was to highlight a request by a boards.ie user for an apparent good cause.

No consideration was given to the political ramifications of the request and indeed at the time none were seen, very few have felt strongly enough to comment - except by a handful of posters on this thread. The banner was pulled on the 8th btw, as the admins were discussing it also.


V.

I think tallaght01 posts highlights a problem here. People expect the admins to defend the cause being hightlighted.

Sleepy

I don't have anything new to input to this really, I think nesf and Boston have expressed my opinion on this. I've said it both on these boards and to your face before, Dev, that were you to ever consider a run at politics you'd have my full support but I would worry about Boards.ie being seen to be a political entity. Even if it were only a perception, it could discourage people from joining and, worse, discourage debate.

DeVore

What will we do if at the next election one political party should come to us and ask to buy banner ads?

Refuse or accept?

What if they use Google to place them?

(replace political party with activist group if needs be).


DeV.

Hagar

Take them all or take none. Apolitical commerce in action.

My 2c.

nesf

Arrange that each major party gets equal coverage.




And then throw a bone to Labour et al to make sure they don't kick up a fuss.

DeVore

How will we demand that one political party buys as many ads as another? What if one doesn't want to buy any?

I agree with Hagar in that we shouldnt refuse advertising from any political party but we can't ensure parity of exposure...

DeV.

DeVore

What if the people who were protesting the closure of St Luke's had *bought* the ads from us? Would that be different?

DeV.

DMC

While in recent times, I have not partaken in b.ie navel gazing sessions, this one pricked my attention.

Having ad campaigns for protests, however well meaning and intentioned, would open a can of worms that would be hard to close.

A banner ad is not a community noticeboard.

Boston

DeVore wrote: »

What if the people who were protesting the closure of St Luke's had *bought* the ads from us? Would that be different?

DeV.

Its hard to argue that boards should turn away money, but there has to be a balance between the need to fund the site and remaining true to what the site is about. If the admins make a decision to go this far and no further then thats one thing, but to have open ended political affiliation which may see the day that FF or others propaganda being advertise is something I wouldn't like to see.

nesf

DeVore wrote: »

What if the people who were protesting the closure of St Luke's had *bought* the ads from us? Would that be different?

That depends completely on whether you want to remain apolitical or not. The site is no longer small enough for it not to be noticed that you're running ads supporting this campaign or another one. I think you guys need to decide on whether you want to go down this road or not and then after that you should know whether you're going to run these ads (for free or for money).

DeVore

Ok this is getting very interesting... honestly, I'm not sure where the lines should be drawn.

My personal opinion (ie: speaking for myself and not on behalf of the admins):
I dont think we should give free ads to anyone but SSF and Boards organised events (like Boards beers).

So, lets take the subject of the site "supporting" issues and external charities offline. We are now solely talking about purchased ad campaigns.

I'm not clear what is being suggested. I agree that we should refuse all or accept all, ie: we should not get into the murky waters of saying "We like you and we'll let you buy our ads, but we don't like those other guys, so we wont sell them ads".

The problem is that as Skunky Anansie sang, "Everything's Political". If we go the first route, allowing anyone who wishes to buy the ad space then we need to be clear that the ads shown in the ad-space do NOT represent the opinion of Boards admins or mods etc. I would have thought that that was fairly obvious already, there are a few companies who have advertised with us that I wouldnt spit on if they were on fire.

If we go the route of not selling them to partisan organisations, where do we draw the line? We could exclude political parties en masse, though I don't like that idea because political parties are part of our democracy (such as it is). We shouldnt treat them like lepers, why are we excluding the site from the political process? But ok, lets say we ban them.

Then there are politicised charities like St Lukes. I guess we have to ban them, now we are into deciding which are devisive and which are warm and fuzzy.

What about companies like Nestle? There are a lot of people who don't like them at all.
Esso? What about Eircom... plenty of people who have a beef with them?

God forbid that 3 should come along and want to buy ads from us! Somebody think of the children...

So... where does that leave us? Where do we draw our line?

These arent rhetorical questions. I genuinely am not sure.

Btw, this isnt about site income (ok, if we said, take no ads at all, then it would be ). Its about considering how far the rabbit hole takes us in the future...

DeV.

RoundyMooney

DeV wrote:

I'm not clear what is being suggested. I agree that we should refuse all or accept all, ie: we should not get into the murky waters of saying "We like you and we'll let you buy our ads, but we don't like those other guys, so we wont sell them ads".

I don't see on a personal level why the admins should not vet prospective advertisers as they see fit.

It's your party after all.

Additionally, being in a position to pick and choose in the first instance is A Good Thing, and infinitely preferable to refusing all content, or allowing all-and then dealing with the attendant accusations of selling out, or "How could you take money from X?"

Don't relinquish control for the sake of impartiality

DeVore

I think the problem then becomes alienation of people who don't agree with our selections or who don't want to be associated with a site of our "persuasion".

I'm fairly comfortable with putting a flag in the sand and saying "this is us, if you are like us and like how we run things, stay" but as you can see from the St Lukes thing, these sorts of decisions can really divide a community when they are made even with the best will in the world...

DeV.