Posts Tagged ‘Kevin Smith’


From EIJ — election results, SPJ/SDX board meetings, resolutions

The following are the results from this year’s SPJ national and regional elections. Results were announced at EIJ ’18 in Baltimore.

President-elect:

  • Patti Gallagher Newberry (unopposed): 791

Secretary-treasurer:

  • Matt Hall: 502
  • Nerissa Young: 347

At-large director (two years; two seats):

  • Mike Reilley: 456
  • Tess Fox: 441
  • Mercedes Vigón: 437
  • Robin Sherman: 180

At-large director (one year; two seats):

  • Yvette Walker: 728
  • Michael Savino: 645

Region 10 director:

  • Don Meyers (unopposed): 47

Region 1 coordinator:

  • Jane Primerano (unopposed): 148

Region 4 coordinator:

  • Paul Kostyu (unopposed): 58

Region 5 coordinator:

  • Amy Merrick (unopposed): 76

Region 7 coordinator:

  • Leah Wankum: 14
  • Katelyn Mary Skaggs: 8

Region 8 coordinator:

  • Kathryn Jones (unopposed): 64

Region 9 coordinator:

  • Ed Otte: 40
  • Rhett Wilkinson: 16

There were 888 votes out of a total of 6,200 possible voters, or 14.3 percent.

*****

Highlights of the SPJ national board meeting on Sept. 27:

  • Stephanie Bluestein, president of the Los Angeles Pro chapter, and Ben Meyerson, a member of the Chicago Headline Club board, expressed their objections to an EIJ sponsorship by the Charles Koch Institute.
  • The board went into executive session at 9:17 a.m. to discuss a personnel issue, potential litigation and a contract issue (EIJ sponsorship). The executive session ended at 11:02 a.m.
  • Executive Director Alison Bethel McKenzie said Lynn Walsh, a former SPJ president, will become a consultant for SPJ in charge of Facebook training.
  • Director of Development Larry Messing said SPJ HQ has submitted a new proposal to the Scripps Howard Foundation for a new focus for the Ted Scripps Leadership Institute. For many years, it was a program to develop SPJ leaders. McKenzie said Scripps Howard “wanted a more dynamic focus.” The new focus will be leadership for college journalists.
  • The board approved new financial requirements for chapters. Region 8 Director Eddye Gallagher voted no. President Rebecca Baker abstained. The board unanimously approved an amendment that allows chapters to choose a method of transparency in their records.
  • President-elect J. Alex Tarquinio said a task force to examine SPJ’s sponsorship policy will start on Sept. 30 and will work on having recommendations by Dec. 1.

*****

Highlights of the SDX national board meeting on Sept. 28:

  • Journalist on Call Rod Hicks said he will work on a news literacy project, to train thousands of people, through SPJ chapters. He also said he is working on a long-term project to work with one community to measure its trust in news over time. He is interested in Casper, Wyoming, which is one of the five states with the lowest trust in media, according to a Gallup survey. He is looking for about 125 people who could attend a session every one or two months.
  • The SDX board also talked about the change in focus of the Scripps Leadership Institute. McKenzie said SPJ is looking at 15 schools, and various news platforms, for the new format.
  • The SDX board voted to change its name to the Socety of Professional Journalists Foundation Board. Jane Kirtley voted no. A big consideration was whether SPJ changes its name from Society of Professional Journalists to Society for Professional Journalism. Some said it was better to stick with “SPJ,” which will be correct either way.
  • Board member Fred Brown said he has finished updating the SPJ ethics book, including a new case study on an anonymous op/ed piece in The New York Times from a supposed White House insider. Board members discussed whether to keep the new version as digital or to have a printed book, too.
  • Board member Paul Fletcher will continue working on an SPJ history book.
  • Messing said there will be a new fundraising effort that allows people to send a text message and get a link on how to donate.
  • Board member Dave Carlson objected to donations from planned giving being added to the general fund, calling it “reprehensible.” The board discussed making a change that calls for money to be placed in a designated fund, instead.
  • Board Treasurer Howard Dubin said SPJ’s headquarters needs about $36,000 in repairs, including stairs and the roof. SPJ and SDX will share the costs. The board unanimously approved spending up to $18,000.
  • The board unanimously approved David Cuillier and Frank LoMonte as new members. Also, Todd Gillman, Irwin Gratz, Evelyn Hsu, Alex Jones, Bill Ketter, Hagit Limor, Robert Leger and Sonya Ross will serve new three-year terms. Lynn Walsh withdrew from serving on the board because she will be paid as a Facebook consultant and wanted to avoid the appearance of a conflict. Al Leeds is leaving the board. The board also approved Gratz as president, Limor as vice president, Sonny Albarado as secretary and Dubin as treasurer.
  • The board went into executive session at 11:14 a.m. to discuss a legal matter and personnel. The executive session ended at 12:30 p.m. When it returned to open session, the board approved hiring a company called Labyrinth to help the SDX Foundation register as a charity in many states. The foundation recently realized it has been raising money in states despite not being registered to do so as a charity. Alex Tarquinio and Todd Gillman voted no. Dave Carlson abstained.

*****

Highlights of the SPJ national board meeting on Sept. 30:

  • The board unanimously ratified appointments to the SDX Foundation Board.
  • President J. Alex Tarquinio shared a meeting schedule for the year. Board meetings for the year will be held Dec. 1 (electronic), Feb. 2 (electronic), April 13, June 1 (electronic), Sept. 5. The Executive Committee will hold electronic meetings on Jan. 19 and June 15.
  • Tarquinio said the board will talk later about appointing two additional members, under a new structure approved last year. There will be nominations by early November.
  • Tarquinio said Eddye Gallagher will be the Nominations Committee chair for the coming year.
  • Tarquinio said she is creating three new task forces to look at a strategic plan, a sponsorship policy and a focus on partnerships.
  • The board discussed the details of what happened with the Charles Koch Institute sponsoring an FOI session at EIJ.
  • Bill McCloskey and Andy Schotz were appointed to the Finance Committee.
  • Lauren Bartlett and Michael Koretzky were appointed to the Executive Committee, along with the board’s officers.
  • The board voted to pick a regional director to fill the seat that Matt Hall vacated to become secretary-treasurer. Tarquinio abstained.
  • Alejandra Cancino, the president of the Chicago Headline Club, criticized SPJ leaders for not following SPJ’s sponsorship policy in allowing the Charles Koch Institute to plan its own sponsored session at EIJ.
  • The board went into executive session at 10:43 a.m. for an orientation session with the board’s attorneys and for a personnel discussion. The executive session ended a 12:10 p.m.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:11 p.m.

*****

At EIJ, delegates discussed the following resolutions:

  • A proposal to change SPJ’s name from Society of Professional Journalist to Society of Professional Journalism was rejected. I believe the vote was 60-19. Some who spoke against the proposal said it has been rejected multiple times before and would not accomplish anything. Former SPJ President Kevin Smith accused the sponsors of the reolution (Michael Koretzky and Mac McKerral in playing a “con game” by not acknowledging clear opposition in a past survey and from a task force. A few supporters said it reflects a change in SPJ’s culture and fits with the challenges we face.
  • A resolution to create a task force on SPJ’s sponsorship policy was approved by a voice vote. Cancino, who submitted the resolution, said she speaks for scores of SPJ members who opposed allowing the Charles Koch Institute sponsor a session this year at EIJ. The Resolutions Committee recommended rejecting the resolution since incoming SPJ President J. Alex Tarquinio already has announced that there would be a task force.
  • Delegates approved a resolution condemning the Oklahoma State University football coach for threatening to cut off access to student journalists who asked his team about the departure of one player. Someone in the public relations office then said there would be repercussions if students reported about the threat.
  • Delegates approved a resolution supporting student media, which faces hostility and/or cuts at many schools.
  • A resolution calling on TV stations to stop sending journalists out into dangerous storms and dramatizing or exaggerating actual conditions was overwhelmingly rejected by a voice vote. Some people said it was offensive to assume that dramatization occurs and added that journalists are kept safe when go out into storms.
  • A resolution was approved in support of Reality Winner, asking President Donald Trump to commute her sentence. Winner was sentenced to five years in prison for leaking a top-secret government report on Russian election hacking.
  • A resolution denouncing the imprisonment and calling for the release of Reuters journalists Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, who were convicted in Myanmar of violating an Official Secrets Act, even though they were performing normal duties related to their jobs.
  • A resolution calling for an SPJ contest solely for retired journalists was rejected.
  • A resolution was passed expressing support for Fred Rogers and Public Broadcasting.
  • A resolution was passed to honor the late Richard D. Hendrickson, who died at age 77 after a lengthy career in journalism and teaching.
  • Resolutions were approved thanking outgoing SPJ President Rebecca Baker for her service and the SPJ staff for its work on EIJ 18.

SPJ board meets by Skype, debates code of ethics

“Transparency” is not just a principle to add to the SPJ Code of Ethics. It’s also a guide for how SPJ conducts its business, especially for the national board.

This week, SPJ took a small step forward as the national board held an electronic meeting.

In the past, remote meetings have been held by conference call, with no chance for the public to participate, listen or observe.

But SPJ has adopted an Openness and Accountability Best Practices Guide that acknowledges that meetings and official business are best done in the open, just as journalists expect of public bodies they cover.

On Wednesday at 7 p.m. Eastern, the SPJ national board used Skype to meet electronically for two topics.

I generally avoid Skype, but the meeting went pretty well. Here is a link to the archived broadcast.

I think we had about 20 people on the call at its peak. We kept from talking over each other by typing a message (“raises hand”) through Skype’s chat function. This is a transcript of that written discussion. In many places, the written comments won’t make sense without hearing the spoken comments.

We still need to do better.

It’s a great sign that links and a transcript of the discussion were posted shortly after the meeting, thanks to Tara Puckey at SPJ headquarters.

Hopefully, a summary of the board’s actions will be provided to all SPJ members soon, too. As the Openness Guide says: “Post a summary of the meeting at a chapter website promptly, preferably within five business days of the meeting, so members can keep abreast of chapter activities. Include any decisions or votes.”

***

We limited the agenda for the electronic meeting to two topics that needed to be discussed before the national convention in Nashville next month.

The first one was easy and quick. SPJ has created a “community” called SPJ Digital.

A community is a group of people with a common interest. It’s similar to a chapter, and can create a leadership structure and organize activities. But, unlike a chapter, it’s not based on geography.

SPJ Digital, led by Alex Veeneman, now has 80 members.

The national board approved the creation of this community by a unanimous voice vote.

***

The second topic — whether to endorse (a non-binding action) the newest draft of proposed changes to the SPJ Code of Ethics — took the bulk of our time.

The SPJ Ethics Committee has worked through three drafts, using public comments and collaboration by the committee last month at a meeting in Ohio.

The draft will go to delegates at the national convention in Nashville. It will be discussed at the opening business meeting Thursday, Sept. 4 (2 to 3:15 p.m.). Then, it will be debated, dissected and likely changed through amendments at the closing business session on Saturday, Sept. 6.

The closing business meeting is also when resolutions are introduced, debated and voted upon and when winning candidates for national SPJ offices are announced and sworn in.

The closing business session is scheduled for two hours – 3 to 5 p.m. Even if there are no controversial resolutions, I don’t expect two hours to be enough for scores of delegates to dissect more than 1,000 words of type and reach an agreement. The national board spent nearly that much time on Wednesday debating just two specific points.

I’m told that if needed, the closing business session can go longer, but not much. The next item on the schedule that day is the Legal Defense Fund Auction/Reception at 6:30 p.m., so the business meeting could run another 60 to 75 minutes or so.

Personally, I think debate over a code of ethics update is one of those extraordinary measures that calls for wiping clear a good chunk of the convention schedule. I’ll be disappointed if delegates’ debate is cut off just to follow a schedule and get to a reception.

***

To start discussion on the code of ethics on Wednesday, Secretary/Treasurer Paul Fletcher, who is on the Ethics Committee, moved that the board endorse the latest draft of the proposed code. Rebecca Tallent, a campus adviser at-large, seconded.

Several board members said they support the new version and it’s time for SPJ to move ahead. (The code of ethics was last updated in 1996.)

Immediate Past President Sonny Albarado agreed with some of the copyediting changes I pointed out in my critique of the third draft, especially fixing the typos. The Ethics Committee will be asked to correct any typos and change passive verb constructions to active.

There also was discussion about how the code of ethics will be turned into a “living document” — although that phrase doesn’t actually describe what would happen. It’s not that the code will be constantly updated. What the Ethics Committee has in mind is an “annotated code,” in which case studies are linked to certain principles for an expanded analysis.

***

Although there was little time or interest in doing a full-scale review of the latest draft during what was expected to be a relatively short board meeting, I recommended two changes.

The first concerned this line, which the Ethics Committee had recommended adding to the code: “Be cautious about reporting suicides that do not involve a public person or a public place.”

Ethics Committee Chairman Kevin Smith, in a blog post, wrote that the committee wanted to give a “gentle reminder” about the balance of private and public lives and whether their suicide deaths should become news, and in what detail.

However, I object to the subtext that suicide still should be seen as taboo and generally not a topic of news coverage. Actually, suicide is a serious national mental health concern and should be covered regularly and openly, whenever people are willing to talk. Those deaths should be handled with sensitivity, just like journalists should for deaths from any other causes, such as accidents.

Besides, the wording of this line, to my reading, has an inadvertent reverse message — that caution is not needed for suicide deaths involving a public person or public place. I don’t think that’s what the committee intended.

I moved that that line be removed from the draft of the code that the board endorsed. Student representative Lindsey Cook seconded.

After further discussion (see the transcript), the board voted in favor of my motion. Since the vote was oral, I’m not certain who voted which way, but I believe there were just three no votes.

***

The only other proposal for changing the draft also was mine.

I recommended that SPJ speak out in its code against anonymous online comments, or at least urge caution in allowing their use. Too many times, I see anonymous online comment threads turn into a cesspool of vicious, angry, racist and even libelous comments, all because people know they don’t have to attach their names to their thoughts.

For years, news organizations automatically allowed this free-for-all, but I’ve noticed that some are rethinking this and either shutting them down or more tightly monitoring them.

I moved that this passage be added in the “Minimize harm” section: “Encourage a civil exchange of public opinions, in which participants don’t mask their identities and poison the conversation. Recognize the potential harm of anonymous online comments.” Region 12 Director Tony Hernandez seconded.

Fletcher initially said he liked my suggestion and would accept it as a friendly amendment. However, there clearly was a difference of opinion (starting on p. 5 of the written transcript), so the board agreed to vote on that amendment.

It was voted down (we thought at the time that it was 11-4, but I now see that it was 10-5).

Yes (5): Schotz, Kopen Katcef, Hallenberg Christensen, Hernandez, Brett Hall

No (10): Corry, Neuts, Cook, Radske, Sheets, Matthew Hall, Fox, Tallent, Gallagher Newberry, Albarado

***

Region 4 Director Patti Gallagher Newberry moved for alternate wording: “Encourage online commenters to identify themselves so as to preserve civil discourse.” President-elect Dana Neuts seconded.

There was some support, but it didn’t acknowledge anonymous online comments; it was too subtle for me.

Matthew Hall proposed another alternate — “Encourage a civil exchange of public opinions” — but the board first had to vote on Gallagher Newberry’s motion.

Here, the discussion picked up and many people chimed in. Gallagher Newberry even recommended another version: “Encourage news consumers to identify themselves and offer civil exchanges when offering feedback to news coverage or issues of the day.” I think this is the version we voted on, although I’m not positive.

The board rejected Gallagher Newberry’s proposal by a voice vote.

***

I then put forward a simplified version of my earlier motion, striking the “poison” reference: “Encourage a civil exchange of public opinions. Recognize the potential harm of allowing anonymous online comments.” Hallenberg Christensen seconded.

There was more support this time, but this, too, was rejected — particularly as some board members were ambivalent about tinkering with the current draft. Again, the roll call vote was tough to monitor, as people’s votes scrolled by quickly, which is one reason we need a better system for an electronic meeting. It’s not good to be unsure of what you’re voting on or what the outcome is. Some people might have voted orally.

My final motion was rejected, 8-5.

Yes (5): Schotz, Gallagher Newberry, Hernandez, Kopen Katcef, Hallenberg Christensen

No (8): Matthew Hall, Cook, Albarado, Corry, Tallent, Fox, Sheets, Neuts

***

Finally, the board voted on whether to endorse the latest draft, as amended (without the reference to suicide).

The board voted 11-4 in favor. However, the transcript of the written comments, where we had been voting, show an incomplete total, missing more than half of the votes.

Here’s how it’s shown in the draft minutes compiled by SPJ headquarters, which are in the packet for the next board meeting:

Yes (11): Brett Hall, Neuts, Hernandez, Gallagher Newberry, Albarado, Hallenberg Christensen, Fox, Matthew Hall, Tallent, Kopen Katcef, Fletcher

No (4): Cook, Koretzky, Schotz, Corry

Abstain (1): Sheets

The meeting was adjourned at 8:54 p.m. Eastern.

A fever over the Code

Here is SPJ review topic number 2 this year: the venerable code of ethics. (The first topic, in the previous post, was whether SPJ should update its name).

There have been several versions of the code. The first one dates to 1926, when Sigma Delta Chi (as SPJ was known at the time) “borrowed” a code from the American Society of Newspaper Editors.

Sigma Delta Chi wrote its own code in 1973. It was updated in 1984, 1987 and 1996.

About four years ago, then-SPJ President Kevin Smith asked the Ethics Commitee, which I chaired, to review the Code of Ethics and consider whether it should be updated again.

That effort was put on hold, though. SPJ was in the midst of publishing a new edition of a book of journalism ethics case studies. Since the book contained the SPJ Code of Ethics, the sentiment among committee members was that this was not the right time to change the code.

Now, in 2013, there is renewed interest in reviewing and possibly updating the code.

Some say parts of the code are dated and, in particular, it doesn’t address new technology, such as social media.

I, however, see the code as a set of structural principles that don’t change because of new methods of collecting and distributing information. The underpinnings of ethical journalism remain the same.

Nonetheless, SPJ is soliciting opinions about the current code and whether and how it should be changed, a little or a lot.

Please share your thoughts by taking this survey.

Then, look at this page on Google Docs to see what others have said.

As of this writing, 92 people had answered.

On the question of whether the code should be updated, 35 said “yes” (38 percent) and 24 said “no” (26 percent). The remaining 33 people (36 percent)  said “not sure – but it’s good to review.”

SPJ will continue the discussion at the chapter and regional level this year and next year. If the consensus is that changes are needed, there will be a draft for delegates to consider at next year’s convention in September in Nashville.

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