It Wasn’t All Fun and Games in Florida

It was great seeing fellow Region 9 members at the Excellence in Journalism conference in Fort Lauderdale. Three of our four pro chapters were well represented, and I saw a few of our student members there.

Like other SPJ conventions, it was a great time to meet with folks from other parts of the country, build up the network and renew friendships. But we also got a lot of work done as well.

One great piece of news that came up during the convention was Rio Grande Pro’s decision to host the 2013 regional convention. As those of you who have hosted a regional conference know, this is not a light undertaking. I’ve been there.  I’ve pledged my support to help in any way I can, and I want to urge everyone in the region to pitch in, whether it is expertise, planning assistance or even money. While the folks in New Mexico are gracious enough to host the chapter, let’s remember it is a regional conference and work together to again demonstrate why this is one of SPJ’s greatest regions. If you are interested in helping, contact Julie Ann Grimm in New Mexico or me. And our good friend and now immediate past-president John Ensslin said he would try to adjust his schedule to come to the regional to represent SPJ’s executive committee.

Here’s a recap of what happened at the national board meeting.

The board voted to create a traveling Ted Scripps Leadership Institute. SPJ used to conduct this great training program at IUPUI’s hotel/conference center in Indianapolis, but the university is closing it to use the space for classrooms and dorms. To replace it, the board voted to give staff the go-ahead to launch a traveling program. The goal is to visit four regions a year, at a place that will be no more than eight hours’ drive for any SPJ member in the region. The program will allow for more people from chapters to get the leadership training and bring it home to strengthen the chapters. Those of you who have been through the training know what a valuable resource this is, so it is exciting to see that it will continue in a way that will make it accessible to more SPJ members than before.

Starting in January, you’ll be able to pay for your SPJ membership with a credit card. Joe Skeel, our national director, told us the office finally has the software package in place to make this possible. This will allow people to set up an automatic renewal on their membership, as well as to pay their dues on a monthly basis rather than yearly. That should make membership a bit affordable. However, you’ll have to opt in to the program, and it will cost an extra $5 a year to cover the cost of processing credit cards. But it has the potential to reduce dues to a $6.67 monthly payment. I’ll post more details as they become available.

The board also voted to roll out an institutional membership program. This will allow a news outlet to join SPJ and get its employees a $15 discount on annual dues. The program will have three tiers  — bronze, silver and gold — with additional benefits for the higher levels. For example, a gold member would pay $1,250 a year and get a free national convention registration for one person and an in-person in-house training program for all employees. Other benefits include a free regional conference registration, free job postings and customized webinar, which would be available to gold and silver institutional members. If you weigh the costs of sending one employee to Poynter, SPJ National or other training programs, the gold membership can be a bargain when you figure you can bring in a high-quality training program for your entire staff each year. Joe Skeel said the program came about after interviewing newsroom managers about what they wanted out of SPJ. One of the goals is to get the SPJ culture into more newsrooms.

SPJ also prepared guidelines for the best practices in chapter finances in the wake of the embezzlement scandal that rocked Region 8 this year. I will send out copies to the chapter leaders, but essentially it calls for additional oversight of chapter accounts and recommends such things as having second signers on checks and regular reviews of the finances.

The board also adopted procedures for creating chapters overseas. This is a response to journalists overseas who see what SPJ stands for and want to see it in their countries.

During our Sunday meeting, the SPJ national board voted to give each of the national committees that meet during the national convention one free convention registration. This is a measure I fought hard for. At points, I felt like Benjamin Franklin working the salons of Paris trying to convince the French to support American independence. But I believe that the national committee chairs are some of the hardest-working people at SPJ’s national level. And for many of them, it is a serious sacrifice to take time away from jobs and families to come to the convention to conduct committee meetings and other tasks at the convention. While a free convention registration doesn’t fully make up for that, it is a way to thank these people for their service. We’re going to do it for one year, with the option to review it at next year’s convention, which will be at the Anaheim Marriott, next door to DisneyLand.

Utah Headliners and Colorado Pro were both recognized in SPJ’s Circle of Excellence for work in FOI and campus relations respectively. Congratulations to those chapters.

I also want to thank you all for your support. You all are the people who truly make SPJ a worthwhile organization. You are the ones in the trenches fighting the battles for open government, encouraging students that journalism is a worthy profession at a time when others are writing its epitath and carrying SPJ’s standards into newsrooms around the region. You are the folks who make SPJ great, and I consider it a privilege to serve as your representative and voice on the national board.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrShare on RedditPin on Pinterest
  • Mark Samenfink

    Huh, guess that wasn’t clear to people in the guidelines. Including me, I think an opinion piece was one of my 5 nominations.

  • Ali Radicali

    Brianna was nominated for balanced journalism?
    Mein sides….

  • Michael Koretzky

    Could be entirely our fault. This is our first year, we’re learning as we go.

  • Mark Samenfink

    Well, at least it’s clear now

  • durka durka

    yeah why is briana wu who knows nothing of the history of tomb raider talks matter? Most people dont even know that lara’s physique was a accident that had to do with a screw up during 3d modeling, psx limited rendering and too many polygons…all that while running out of time and having to push a character out. The first 3 games have nearly identical graphics so nothing could be done, after that the character was established. By the time the game went to the hd era, half the gameplay was gone but “oh its progressive because lara isnt dressed sexilly anymore and has smaller breasts”

    Half the game is gone, traps gone, medkits gone, ammo scanvanging gone, keys gone, yet another cover based shooter that interupts the gameplay every 4 minutes with a cutscene but “the character is more representitive of women now”

    You know what else is more representitive now? generic dudes with guns, what happen to the dinosaurs and the monsters from the old games?

    I swear the progressive press has no idea what makes games good, which is why they keep shilling their hipster buddies “emotional” walking simulators.

  • Jeremy Fine

    Michael, “we don’t care what you think” has been the common refrain from SPJ since day one, whether it was your button-pushing “updates” or your irritating habit of listening to the loudest people instead of taking a wider view.

    And now, as a response, you’ve created an award that, by design, excludes any material that could actually demonstrate the wild imbalance that actually took place, by demanding that its presence in reality not be demonstrated?

    What a sad day this is. You had the chance to show you had balls, and instead, you retreated back into your hugbox, where you pretend you are capable of that which you have failed to demonstrate chronically:

    Objectivity.

  • bryoneill11

    If kotaku or Polygon ending up winning some shit, all this was for nothing.

  • chizwoz

    Not necessarily. Not everyone at Polygon and Kotaku are as bad as their worst offenders like Kuchera and Hernandez. Totilo wrote very reasonably about Daniel Vavra’s participation with gamergate and Owen Good at Polygon wrote a very impartial piece on the airplay thingy.
    While I would probably agree that the games industry would be a better place if these 2 sites just went out of business, that’s probably not going to happen. So trying to improve them is more realistic approach.

  • SPJ AirPlay

    I’ll give you “irritating” and even “button-pushing” – I’m self-actualized enough to concede those traits – but how can a contest fail to be objective because it eschews opinion?

  • Vetarnias

    For the news reporting category, I can understand: it’s a fairly traditional way of describing it, but I doubt you will find much of it in the gaming press, which tends towards hype. Brave games journalism is rare (and Kotaku’s maudlin “Ubisoft and Bethesda blacklist us!” doesn’t really count if it’s just a passive-aggressive way to arm-twist them into feeding Kotaku content that it can get page hits from), and what little of it exists should be rewarded, yes. It’s not the place for opinion pieces.

    But for features, though, why not? Why don’t opinion pieces count? Or essays? Or anything that bears a passing resemblance of what goes on in video games writing? If those are out, I’m not even sure what would be left to qualify. It’s even more obvious for the video categories, as all you’ll find there is opinion.

    Surely you don’t buy the GamerGate narrative that there can exist such a thing as an “objective review”? Assuming that you don’t, is this post really saying that the Kunkels – with opinion pieces out of the way – don’t even have an award for game reviewing, when the Pulitzers, just to name those, have prizes for both editorials and criticism? That what is missing from the current state of affairs is precisely recognition for video games reviewing?

    Likewise, does that mean that the entire field of “new games journalism” is disqualified because it values its very subjectivity? Never mind that I’m quite certain that if in 20 years’ time, if not sooner, it will be the only kind of games writing from today that will still be read – and if not that, then nothing.

    Which is how I interpret the Kunkel Awards in the light of this update: it’s all for naught.

    Would you care to point to a piece of writing (ideally one too old to qualify for these awards), that exemplifies what you consider to be an admissible feature?

  • Linny May

    Below is All Journalists review of Every video game – sans opinion:

Connect

Twitter Facebook Google Plus RSS Instagram Pinterest Pinterest LinkedIn


© Society of Professional Journalists. All rights reserved. Legal

Society of Professional Journalists
Eugene S. Pulliam National Journalism Center, 3909 N. Meridian St., Indianapolis, IN 46208
317/927-8000 | Fax: 317/920-4789 | Contact SPJ Headquarters | Employment Opportunities | Advertise with SPJ