Here is a questionnaire which looks at some of the possible concerns and solutions about media on site, and gives you a chance to say what you thought was good or bad about last year's strategy.
Please email replies to firstname.lastname@example.org or phone 0777 286 1099.
Last year the media coverage of the camp was a huge success and hundreds of thousands of people heard about the camp, the action at Drax and the need to take action on climate change.
The message we get out through the media is an important part of the aims of the camp to educate people about climate change and inspire a movement.
Last year we invited media on site for one hour each day, accompanied by members of the media team.
This allowed them to talk to people, see how the camp worked and take pictures. They were asked to follow guidelines regarding not taking pictures of people who did not want to be photographed, not going into meetings or workshops without the consent of parrticipants, and not to be disruptive or intrusive to activity that was going on.
1.How effective do you think this strategy was last year?
(on a scale of 1 – 5, 1= poor, 5= perfect!)
1a.Explain why you think that. What was good/bad:
2. Which of the following options for dealing with the media at the camp this year would you be happy with? (by journalist we mean someone who is coming to the camp to cover it for a mainstream press/radio/tv not alternative media or people who work in the media but are coming to the camp as a participant)
Circle as many as you are happy with.
1 - No contact with journalists.
2 - No contact with jounalists from certain publications.
3 - No journalist allowed on the site.
4 - Pre approved journalists allowed on site during an advertised media time. With conditions.
5 - Any journalist allowed on site during advertised media hour with conditions.
6 - Pre approved journalists without cameras allowed on site for a longer period, perhaps overnight. With conditions.
7 - Pre approved journalists invited on actions. With conditions.
8 - Any journalist allowed on site for a longer period with conditions.
9 - Any journalist allowed on site no conditions beyond those that apply to all on the site.
2a. If you have major objections to any, or if you think any are a very good idea, please explain why below.
2b.If there are conditions that could be imposed that would remove your objection, please list them.
3.Are there any days that you think there should be no journalists allowed on site, why?
4. Are there any publications/media groups you think we should not have contact with, why?
5. What approval process would you want journalists to go through, and why?
5a. If we pre approved journalists, how many journalists would be too many and why?
6. Any journalists you think we should invite?
7. What level of participation would we welcome from journalists staying on site?
(EG: Would they stay in neighourhoods, help with tasks such as cooking or building loos? Go to workshops? Go to decision making meetings? Go on actions? How would we deal with anyone who was antagonistic to their presence?)
Alternative media and cameras on site.
Last year the guidelines on people filming on site or taking pictures to document the camp or to put up on Indymedia was unclear, and so the camp was not as well documented as it might have been.
8. What guidelines would you be happy with for people on site (ie. not mainstream journalists) with cameras?