[Lnc-business] cosponsors requested to have staff manage social media

[Alicia Mattson]

Sam,

So is your desire to just have LNC members/alternates in a supervisory
role, or in the role of posting public comment?  If it's just a supervisory
role, I don't think it should be our job to do that, but I'm okay with
allowing such access to the page.  But I'm not sure I want LNC
members/alternates making the postings instead of staff.  If a 4th
co-sponsor was interested with some tweaks, we could hash out some
alternate language.

-Alicia




-Alicia


On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 6:00 AM, Sam Goldstein <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Alicia,
>
> Would you consider adding "members and alternates"  to your motion
> following "LNC"?  If so I will
> co-sponsor.
>
>
>
> Sam Goldstein
> Libertarian National Committee
> Member at Large
> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
> Indianapolis IN 46260
> 317-850-0726 <(317)%20850-0726> Phone
> 317-582-1773 <(317)%20582-1773> Fax
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm asking for co-sponsors for a motion to insert a new Policy Manual
>> Section 2.06.5 Social Media to read as follows:
>>
>> Only LNC employees and contractors shall serve as administrators of,
>> serve as moderators of, or post content to, the Party’s social media
>> accounts. Volunteer content creators may submit content for approval.
>>
>> At the LNC meeting there was majority support for the motion to both do
>> the above and also to create a committee to review our social media
>> processes.  I could have supported it, but if we know what we need to do to
>> fix the problem, why spend the time to have a committee study it first?
>> Just fix it.  I thought there was majority support for the other motion to
>> simply turn control of our social media back over to staff.  Turns out that
>> I was mistaken, and one person was not willing to turn control back over to
>> staff without the creation of the committee, so then the other motion
>> failed.  Because I misread the room, an option that actually had majority
>> support didn't pass.
>>
>> Now that we have separately created the committee, I want to go back and
>> re-visit turning control back over to our staff.
>>
>> Please note that the motion welcomes volunteers to submit material.  It
>> does not eliminate their opportunity to contribute.
>>
>> I want to add some details to the discussion we had in Pittsburgh, with
>> two Facebook PR blow-ups on our minds at the time.
>>
>> Since Pittsburgh, we have had yet another PR disaster.  Granted it was
>> not on our official FB page, but on the personal page it was posted to, the
>> person's party position was touted right there in the sidebar, and we took
>> a lot of damage from it.  The Convention Oversight Committee lost two very
>> valuable volunteers over this latest disaster -- volunteers who did a lot
>> of work for us in Orlando and were again helping for New Orleans.  Gone.
>>
>> There are no group votes before volunteers post on the party's FB.  One
>> person puts it into the schedule, and unless someone else sees it and
>> objects, it goes public.  We publish so much material that the APRC doesn't
>> always have time to review everything in advance.  Though the group has an
>> informal rule against people posting their own material, people sometimes
>> do it anyway.  The comments about the military could easily have been
>> posted on our page.
>>
>> There was a very recent incident in which a new volunteer was driven to
>> quit on the same day she joined for the crime of suggesting that we post
>> more positive material and less negative material.  I don't want to hear
>> that the LNC giving final control to staff is somehow disrespecting the
>> work of the volunteers, when that new volunteer's desire to contribute was
>> so summarily disrespected.
>>
>> We have some important policies that I don't believe the volunteers have
>> even been informed about, and volunteers are not really accountable for
>> following policies in the same way that our staff is.
>>
>> Policy Manual Section 2.09.6:
>>
>> Party resources shall not be used to provide information or services for
>> any candidate for party office unless:
>>
>>    - such information or services are available and announced on an
>>       equal basis to all Libertarians who have declared they are seeking that
>>       office, or
>>       - such information or services are generally available and
>>       announced to all party member
>>
>> Not all party members have access to post on our Facebook page.  Not all
>> candidates for internal party office are offered the chance to post on our
>> Facebook page.
>>
>> I think some of our Facebook posts cross the line into personal promotion
>> of people who intend to run for internal party office at the next
>> convention.
>>
>> There was a time in the past when staff established criteria to try to
>> manage application of this policy, with criteria for what constituted
>> "news" or "earned media" that involved a candidate, etc.  I don't believe
>> there is any such attention to his policy right now for our social media.
>> Some candidates have already declared.  The closer we get to a national
>> convention, the more these posts will be perceived as self-promotion that
>> unfairly isn't available to their opponents.
>>
>> So I'm asking for co-sponsors for this motion, to return final decision
>> power to our staff, who are expected to know and follow our policies, and
>> who are accountable to the LNC.  The volunteer groups can continue to
>> generate material just like they do now, but staff would schedule the
>> actual posts.
>>
>> If the Social Media Process Review Committee comes back to us with
>> suggestions for reasonable ways to manage this later, we can amend this
>> policy.
>>
>> -Alicia
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170526/7f2f41e1/attachment-0002.html>