Hi all,


I'm Anusha, VP of Communications at the Foundation. We share everyone’s concerns on the direction of Twitter and very much agree that values are a big part of the way we communicate and show up in the world. Over the last several weeks, we’ve been watching this issue closely. There is a lot to look at—not just the communications outreach and technical bit of a presence on Mastodon, but also the legal, social, and safety factors like the data retention policy for an existing instance, the potential to access the private messages of accounts, or using Foundation resources for the tech and social media management of an account, and how this connects to our vision [1]. 


We want to be thoughtful and thorough in how we approach these questions and that takes time. We’re exploring with Foundation teams and we also have an upcoming meeting with the Communications Committee [2] - this is on the agenda. That meeting will help provide some valuable input and insights from community members in addition to what we’ve heard here.


I appreciate the concerns and perspectives shared on this thread and elsewhere. We’ll update folks on the social media talk page [3] and welcome more thoughts there. Thank you. 


Anusha 


[1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/vision/

[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_committee

[3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Social_media



On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 12:27 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158@hotmail.com> wrote:
I agree that Wikipedia handles should join Mastodon. But, again, opening a social media channel needs a strategy. Currently, there's no strategy for the Twitter account, so opening an account in Mastodon without strategy would be a bad decision.

(Still waiting the social media team to define their monthly audience, really opaque statistics)

Best

Galder

From: The Cunctator <cunctator@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2023 1:33 AM
To: Antoine Musso <hashar@free.fr>
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Mozilla's social media pledge
 
No, I'm saying it is opaque who of the 41-member comms department at WMF edits Diff. Standard practice even for non-profit publications is for the masthead to be public.

On Tue, Jan 3, 2023, 11:34 AM Antoine Musso <hashar@free.fr> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 9:06 PM geni <geniice@gmail.com
> <mailto:geniice@gmail.com>> wrote:
...
>     It has:
>
>     https://diff.wikimedia.org/ <https://diff.wikimedia.org/>
> ...
Le 03/01/2023 à 15:32, The Cunctator a écrit :
 > Pretty amusing that it's incredible opaque who edits it.
 >

Hello The Cunctator,

I am assuming your reply was asking who can edit Diff. I don't think
posts are editable in the sense of a Wiki.  Proposing a content on Diff
is open to anyone as long as it fit in its scope. There are more
informations at:

* https://diff.wikimedia.org/about/
* https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Diff_(blog)

The blog is managed by the WMF Movement Communications team:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Movement_Communications
who will assist in polishing up your draft blog post before it is published.

cheers,

--
Antoine "hashar" Musso
Wikimedia Release Engineering


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XEG4UOFKAIUECUNAADXU6T4TL2FMWYCX/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org