Since this has been argued “ad nauseum” I’ll cut to the end and leave out the beginning and middle.

Lee Iacocca said it best, “you can either lead, follow or get out of the way.” We didn’t take a leadership position in this instance. You can decide if we managed to get out of the way.

I can say this because I have been a dues paying member of SPJ for the last 30 years. I’ve seen some truly exceptional and some truly terrible presidents. The good ones knew how to lead and inspire. The others? Not so much.

I believe SPJ will survive only if it goes back to its core mission of advocating for journalism and journalists. I don’t believe all the training programs and “stuff” ever landed us a long-term (or even short term) member.

We should be the first to defend student and professional journalists and we should do it better, faster and smarter than anyone else. That will get us members and more important guarantee both our organization and journalism a future.

As for Mr. Koretzky, no one in his or her right mind would ever read his blog and assume for a second that his opinions reflect the organization. He is way too passionate about journalism and way too clever in what he says and how he says it.

Adequate fact-finding should be done, and it was in this case. The response should also be swifter, as you mention it occasionally has been in the past. And, in fact, the response was swift — it just did not have your stamp of approval, John. Rather than demanding the removal of the response, the “teamwork” solution would’ve been to append an “editor’s note” or “president’s note” at the top making it clear this was not SPJ’s official position.

It’s also a red herring to suggest Koretzky didn’t show both sides of the story because he didn’t quote a board member saying no comment (which is what would’ve happened, at best — they were turning media away from the open house and not returning phone calls). That would not have improved the story. He sent someone he trusted to go make an independent assessment, worked with her to collect the facts, and then trusted her judgment — like any editor would.

And your characterization of that criticism is inaccurate, by the way, if you’re referring to the first comment on Koretzky’s blog Saturday morning. (If you are not, it’s not clear who you’re referring to. Likewise with the tweet that claimed Koretzky’s was SPJ’s official position. I don’t doubt you, but that’s easily sourced.) That comment came from alum Chuck Reese, who was also “appalled that the president of the SPJ asked you to take down the blog post.”

But he was not upset Koretzky didn’t contact management — he was upset Koretzky didn’t speak with *alums,* because they would have vouched for what the bylaws say. Yet in your post, you suggest you wouldn’t write or act based on hearsay (“simply took as gospel what the students had to say”) anyway.

Further to the point, Koretzky responded to that criticism exactly fourteen minutes later. That’s actually more responsive and accountable than the “old school,” and a great example of how unfolding news is ethically reported in the digital age.

My favorite sentence in your post is this one: “There are two basic reasons to do advocacy work. One is to feel good about yourself after having gotten off a righteous letter. The other is to actually accomplish real and meaningful change.”

I whole-heartedly agree, and I wouldn’t be a member if I didn’t support our journalism advocacy. But despite good intentions, I feel SPJ too often does the former. We can do better, and I’m glad to hear you agree.

Those folks who know me only by reputation will find that hard to believe.

Those who truly know me know this: I respect honesty and objectivity.

Ensslin and I disagree on a crucial SPJ issue. But we haven’t called each other names. We haven’t accused each other of trying to destroy SPJ. We haven’t tried to destroy each other.

As an SPJ board member, I’ll push hard for debate on this issue. I may well lose the argument. If so, I’ll be none too pleased. But I won’t throw my shoes at Ensslin’s head, either.

That’s how it should be. That’s all I ever wanted it to be. Some SPJers get that. Some don’t. Sadly, and perhaps coincidentally, the ones who don’t always seem to be the ones in power.

– Koretzky