EU policy/Strategy/FoP

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Home Icon by Lakas.svg Home   About icon (The Noun Project).svg About   Statement icon (The Noun Project).svg Statement   Monitor icon (The Noun Project).svg Monitoring   Documents icon - noun project 5020.svg Documentation   Take Action icon (The Noun Project).svg Handouts   Team icon - noun project 20586.svg Team   Tranparency icon (The Noun Project).png Transparency


Strategy

Freedom of Panorama

 

This is the working page for our strategy to achieve universal Freedom of Panorama across the EU.
You may also just take a look at our more condensed argumentation on FoP.

1. Goals[edit]

Define greater goals:


2. Power Mapping[edit]

Specific policy, legislation or practice that needs to be changed to achieve greater goal:


Describe the process (step by step) by which policy, legislation or practice should be changed (if possible show different ways to get there):


List institutional decision making bodies (e.g. ministries, committees) that have the power of decision to introduce the sought changes:


List individual people (if known), who have the greatest responsibility in making such decisions. If possible produce a power map (chart showing hierarchy and succession):


Which political parties influence or control these decision-makers?


List other organisations and enterprises that lobby on this topic. Include a short description of strengths and weaknesses.


Briefly estimate the political feasibility of targeted change in the current political situation and mark it on a scale from 1 to 10, 10 being the most feasible:


Briefly estimate the technical feasibility of targeted change within the institutions (i.e. Does a given institution have the necessary expertise, personnel and financial resources?) and mark it on a scale from 1 to 10, 10 being the most feasible:

3. Building Your Case[edit]

List facts and figures that confirm the existence of your issue and help you argument your intended change. Do you have enough?


Name experts/independent studies that deliver helpful facts and figures which help or prove your arguments. If not available: How could a intellectual base for the arguments be constructed?


If possible, list different ways to bring about intended change. What are their respective advantages?

4. Objectives[edit]

Briefly list the succession of changes/decisions that are necessary to achieve your goal (sub-ordinate targets):


Rank your sub-ordinate targets according to importance or chronologically, whichever makes more sense:


5. Develop a Communications Strategy[edit]

Message:


Ask(s):


30-Second Pitch:


3-Minute Pitch:


List political or pressure groups whose support is necessary or helpful to achieve sub-ordinate targets or intended change:


If necessary, develop a modified message for some or each of these groups:


Name 3-5 mainstream media outlets that are most likely to pick up message and communicate it to a large audience (>100.000)


Name 3-5 most important social media channels for your issue.


6. Tactics and Implementation[edit]

Examples for tactics:

  • Coalition building
  • Direct lobbying (e.g. talking to decision-makers)
  • Online-activism
  • Traditional, local activism
  • Events/conferences
  • Demonstrations/protests
  • Showcase/pilot project
  • Strategic media relations
  • Advocacy over specialised press/niche media channels
  • Research/studies
  • Political Consultancy
  • Legal/administrative (suing/appealing/FOI requests)
  • Petitions


List the tactics that were already used by your organisation:


List the tactics that your organisations plans to use:


Name the sub-ordinate goals that are to be achieved with each tactical instrument (e.g. famous supporter, react to counter-arguments, increase public support):


If using an online list of supporters, please asses its reach. Name 2-3 tactics to grow the list:


List the tactical tools that will be used within the next three months (order by priority/effectiveness):


Based on the power map, name the 3-5 most important decision-makers. If meeting them is not feasible, name other people in their organisations that would have an influence on them: