Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Pride Toronto declines offer to livestream AGM

Pride Toronto (PT) has issued a clampdown on media ahead of the Sept 23 annual general meeting.

Appended to a statement on the PT website announcing six contenders for the board was a message forbidding attendees from shooting video or taking photos at the event.

“No filming or photography will be permitted during the meeting, due to the privacy concerns of our members and volunteers,” it reads.

It also asks media to contact PT in advance to arrange photos or interviews.

PT executive director Tracey Sandilands did not respond to messages left for her.

Xtra offered to livestream video of the AGM, making it accessible to those who are housebound or have other commitments that evening. The event would be streamed online in real time and archived online after the event. Viewers watching from home would be able to comment and interact with the proceedings.

In an email response, interim PT co-chair Margaret Ngai declined the offer.

“Due to the nature of the subject Pride Toronto is involved in, we usually try to respect the privacy of our members and volunteers who would like to remain anonymous.  Therefore, we are not allowing any photography or videography (or any visual records) at the AGM. The only exception will be any media interviews that are arranged through our media committee with the consent of the participants,” she wrote.

No one from the board agreed to an interview.

Asked if audio recordings will be permitted, Ngai said yes, with one caveat.

“Audio will likely be okay, as we don't generally require members to identify themselves when they have questions or comments on the floor. I would ask, if that happens, to please be respectful and remove that section of audio before making it public,” she wrote.



Four of the six board applicants agreed to answer questions at an all-candidates style debate hosted by the Pride Coalition for Free Speech on Sept 8: David Demchuk, Martin Kuplens-Ewart, Roy Mitchell and Mark Smith. That event was livestreamed on xtra.ca and video is available online.

UPDATE, SEPT 22: PT cochair Margaret Ngai sent the following clarification to Xtra late last night:

"An Annual General Meeting is NOT a public meeting. It is a private member meeting, and as such, we request any media and recordings that are registered with and allowed by our Media Committee to only identify any attendees that have provided explicit consent. As you are well aware, many members of our communities cannot, for a variety of reasons, publicly acknowledge their ties with activities related to the communities. Pride Toronto value our promise of privacy to our members and volunteers."

The Pride Toronto AGM is open to the public, although only members will be able to vote. It will be held on Sept 23 at 6:30pm at the Church St Public School, 83 Alexander St (at Church).

Bookmark and Share  

Comments

Tuesday, September 21, 2010 6:46 PM

Good god Xtra. Give it a rest.

Karl ca


Tuesday, September 21, 2010 6:39 PM

I think this is a simple answer Xtra is the propaganda box of the QuAIA and is no longer the voice the community as a whole, just to serve the interests of this group which they seem to be in bed with.

WTF ca


Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:06 PM

The OBVIOUS way to meet the equally important requirements of (1) access and transparency and (2) respecting the safety and privacy concerns of attendees is to keep the video cameras trained on those running the meeting and only transmitting audio of those who are not onstage.

Shame on PT for, yet again, hiding behind process and procedure to avoid scrutability.

Shawn Syms ca


Tuesday, September 21, 2010 9:57 PM

What many of you seem to not realize is that Pride Toronto doesn't actualy even have to allow the media (or the public) to attend. An agm is a closed meeting of the organization's members, and they can choose to exclude anyone that is not a member. The fact that they are not doing so should be ample evidence of transparency. Just because they aren't going to allow Xtra to bully them and get its own way doesn't mean they are conspiring about something. Time to get over yourselves..

Lianne ca


Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:26 PM

I think that it would be good if Pride was more transparent with the community. Lianne is right- they don't have to be. But it would be good for community relations.

AK ca


Wednesday, September 22, 2010 12:46 PM

Oh my god - it's not like Pride Toronto issued a publication ban. They offered to arrange interviews if scheduled ahead of time. PT even said Xtra could audio record the damn meeting, as long as the privacy of the organization's members is protected. That's transparent enough for me. I'm with Lianne on this one - Xtra, get over yourselves! You're really embarrassing yourselves here.

Karl ca


Wednesday, September 22, 2010 2:50 PM

how great that Pride is accommodating closet cases. I agree that AGM's are private and for members only, but what's strange about Pride is it is a community event and some kind of compromise should be made - closet cases sit in the back in trench coats, shades and hats over their heads. Yep, let's make this AGM a 1983 AGM! Lots to hide and it's not about who's queer or not. Thanks to Xtra for keeping the homefires burning...all you complainers, stop hating.

wicked ca


Wednesday, September 22, 2010 2:11 PM

@WTF. Do you dream about QuAIA and have it for breakfast? When don't you relate everything to QuAIA and its evil plan to take over the world? Give it a rest. The world still is spinning and even though QuAIA is collecting the bombs to blow up Church St, the world will be a much nicer place when you accept the will of Allah. Man, you're paranoia is contagious!

wicked ca


Wednesday, September 22, 2010 3:34 PM

Lianne, what you are saying that Pride has no obligation to allow the press (or anyone) into the AGM might have some truth to it. They are a private organization, so probably that's legal. The problem is this: Pride constantly claims to speak on behalf of the _entire_ queer and trans community, including me. When they do their business dealings, when they make money, whatever they do it is all done in our names. Personally, I feel that if Pride is going to claim to represent me, then I should have a say in how it is operated (or at the very least have the opportunity to observe its decision-making process). Especially that is true considering that many in the heterosexual cisgender world get their information about my issues from Pride.

So, if Pride wants to drop its claim that it represents the entire queer and trans community and instead operate as an exclusive private queer organization (representing a handful of middle and upper-class white gays and lesbians with a few token people of color) then that is okay. They can keep us all out of the AGM as long as they don't operate in my name.

Or Pride can keep its claim to represent the entire community by letting us all in and allowing us to participate in the damn thing.

So which will it be Lianne? You can't have it both ways.

Savannah ca


Thursday, September 23, 2010 9:44 PM

Yes Xtra, I appreciate you are trying to make yourself relevant beyond the reach of Shawn Syms. I know how much it sucks when everyone else moves on, but when you're randomly pulling at straws that include Mr. Syms, it is both unbecoming and a bit embarrassing. Go report on a drag show, highlight the lack of bicycle racks on Church Street or compare brunch places. It's much more relevant.

Chris Mack ca



Comments are closed

Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.4.0.0

The Roundup

Xtra.ca's Roundup
blog is your source
for news and
analysis that has
queer people
talking.

The Roundup is
written by Xtra's
staff reporters:

Rob Salerno
rob.salerno@xtra.ca

Andrea Houston
andrea.houston@xtra.ca

Natasha Barsotti
natasha.barsotti@xtra.ca

and

Adam Glen
Editorial Intern


Log in
Feed Subscribe