SND/Update

104 Comments

Most recent by Gina Dvorak

• Thanks, Matt and Bonita, for setting this up. I’m working page one tomorrow night and the chat falls in the middle of our news meeting, so I’ll post my questions now:
  • What is the nature of the split on the board? Is it about direction for the organization? Finances? Education?
  • If the disagreements are about direction, I and perhaps other members would like a more public discussion so that we could learn about the issues at hand perhaps share our perspectives.
  • How does SND plan to spend its resources to respond to the changing nature of the business? I assume that membership is down and there were fewer entries than in past years for the contest. Yet SND’s plans seem more wide-ranging than in previous years.
  • What is the procedure for electing a new president?
  • What is the role of the past presidents and “founding members”? Who are they?
  • Do you see a change in mission for SND? Matt laid down some pretty ambitious goals in his six months as president. Will they continue? Change?
  • Does the current crisis suggest a more open and transparent SND?
  Thanks for taking my questions and, as the nutjobs on call-in radio always say, I’ll take my answer off of the air.
  dan

  Jun 15, 2009 at 09:36 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (The Boston Globe)

• I second Dan’s questions.

  I’m also curious, how can young people help? Kind of broad I know, but what opportunities are there for us to contribute ideas, volunteer and get more involved from our homes and schools since we’re starting new jobs or can’t afford to travel/attend seminars?

  Jun 15, 2009 at 11:10 pm — Mike Higdon (SND)

• I believe this is the first time in the history of SND where a President has resigned. Was it truly voluntary? We want real answers please.

  And has the executive director’s resignation got anything to do with Matt’s decision, both having come at the same time.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 12:43 am — Peter Ong (Sydney)

• This is more of a suggestion that could lead to questions, I suppose, but here’s a predicament many of us find ourselves in, but I’ll use myself as an example.

  I was trained as a journalist and love the news; design as a practice in the newsroom came second to that in the timeline of my education. As a layoff “victim” (I can’t think of a better word right now), I find myself underqualified for both design and communications jobs. It’s hard to convince recruiters and HR people, most of whom are receiving my resume facelessly through Career Builder, etc., that although I’ve spent 10 years as a professional journalist that I also can write and edit and adequately represent their organization. I’m also vastly underqualified for most design jobs. I don’t think too many firms are fluent in CCI and I know I’m not fluent in Flash or HTML, being naive enough or too unprepared to see this downfall of print coming so quickly. I know there are grants and quickcourses that cover a lot of training, but those seats and funds are limited, both by SND and by my own personal change in income.

  That being said, is there any way we could try pairing or grouping folks like me with a more advanced Web/Video/Multi-Media member to use as a touchstone during our personal training? Ideally, I think this would not be a partnership to be abused, and I wouldn’t expect my mentor to teach me, per se, but I’m sitting down with HTML for Dummies and I’ve got a quick question about something I don’t understand, or I want someone to take a quick look at a project, even if it’s bad, just to make sure I’ve got the technology under control.

  I appreciate everything SND is doing to help members during this rough time, but isn’t this exactly the time for SND to use its network in this way? We’re having free meetups. Why not free mentoring? A tech buddy! Maybe this is way out of the scope of what you’ll be touching on tomorrow, and perhaps you already have some kind of plan like this in place. But outside of a newsroom, where you had all kinds of touchstones of information just across the way, it’s a lot harder to connect with like-minded people who can help. My Mom can barely send an e-mail. She’s not my go-to gal….for this.   I will even pay my dues and volunteer to spearhead this effort if necessary.

  So was that a question? Kind of. Does it pertain to tomorrow’s discussion? I’m not so sure. But here’s a forum and will use it.  Hope it’s worth something.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 01:57 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (Chicago)

• I too am hoping to learn what has happened. As journalists we must first deal with the news. I propose two graphics be made to visually explain what transpired.

  SND members, IMHO, are due one graphic that shows who is on the board and lists their duties and identify their positions of support for strategic directions. We do these all the time for members of Parliament, Congress and corporation boards.

  And I would really appreciate a timeline that details exactly what has been happening behind closed doors at these meetings and when.

  I heart SND and hope the membership can be made whole again. Clearly the leadership could use this opportunity to embrace transparency in their mission. So far, the memos are as clear as mud.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 09:11 am — robb montgomery (Visual Editors)

• Word on the transparency, Robb.

  SND leadership is a government principally elected by its citizens, who pay taxes to fund that government.

  Journalists demand open government. They should demand the same from a journalism organization.

  The basic questions as outlined above by Dan and Robb are very good. Also want a better characterization of why the executive director is leaving other than “to pursue other opportunities.”

  Finally, a plea for the following two ground rules:
  * No side-stepping. Answer the questions directly.
  * Please avoid gratuitous “members are our core. We love our members” lines if they don’t directly answer a question.
  * Do not begin by saying “we’re putting this behind us (meaning we’re not going to tell you anything) and moving on for the future.”

  Remember, the world’s most transparent thing is an informationless news conference.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 11:10 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (TwinCities.com | Pioneer Press)

• One more question:
  • Did Executive Director Elise Burroughs leave because she got another job or was she dismissed for cause?

  Jun 16, 2009 at 11:49 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (The Boston Globe)

• Maybe this organization has become too elite… And maybe it’s time to refocus on what the regular members need. We seem to be really interested in becoming an international whatever and I have no idea why…

  All that time our regular members are under fire daily. Upper management still wonders if we provide value…

  My dues are not paid by my company any more, my pay has been cut and my daughter is in college. What value am i getting? And understand I’m not a late-comer to this organization — I’ve been a member off and on since the late 80s — and I don’t know it’s value anymore…

  Jun 16, 2009 at 11:58 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Nicely said here:

  http://visualjournalism.com/internal-dispute-in-society-of-news-design-snd-president-resigns/2009/06/16/

  Jun 16, 2009 at 12:20 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (TwinCities.com | Pioneer Press)

• I would like to echo what Mr. Booher and Ms. Bodgdas seem to be concerned with: value.

  I feel like this organization missed a turn somewhere along the way. SND could have become a reservoir of support. Instead, I’ve increasingly felt SND exists only to feed the egos of designers rather than help them increase their value within their own organizations. As our industry takes hit after hit, I’m sure it’s not long before executives start to wonder whether it really matters what their papers and web sites look like. Form follows function, after all, especially in a budget crisis.

  Utility is the key to survival — for designers, for newspapers and their web sites, for journalism. But this organization increasingly rewards the beautiful while barely acknowledging the sort of creative thinking and presentation that truly keeps the reader in mind.

  What I need from SND is help. I need people at the top of their game to help me figure out how to be a good mentor to lesser-skilled designers.

  I need SND to understand that I no longer have days to polish a weekend package, or weeks to work on that special section. In truth, I’m often having to be the most creative on the fly and am sometimes relied upon to “save” the front page because a CP was hobbled or just plain fell through.

  Like most of us here, I have much respect for those who have stepped down. But maybe this executive shake-up is just the turning point this organization needs. Better, I think, to embrace the opportunity for change here.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 02:04 pm — Gina Dvorak (The Sun/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin in San Bernar)

• Apologies… I spelled Ms. Bogdas’ name incorrectly.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 02:05 pm — Gina Dvorak (The Sun/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin in San Bernar)

• Bogdas, I really like your idea. Having just graduated I feel exactly the same way as you. I learned all these things that have suddenly evolved. I fight to chase the world of design one skill at a time.

  I also think there are a lot of young people with more skills than us because of what they are learning in/out of school and they could use a professional mentor as much as we could use them for their know-how.

  I’ll help you spearhead that effort.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 02:30 pm — Mike Higdon (SND)

• I’m sorry, but this did not answer a thing

  Jun 16, 2009 at 03:13 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• I, too, was hoping to get more out of this discussion. I suppose there were a lot of comments coming in, but I would have liked to know a little more about that creative agenda Matt alluded to in one of his early chat posts. It leads me to wonder whether philosophical differences were at the source of this seemingly major disruption.

  Also, while I deeply respect that the SND officers are volunteers, and that such a responsibility would be rather time consuming… I imagine all of them know this going in, most especially those who have been pretty heavily involved in the organization for quite some time. How did this suddenly become an insurmountable issue?

  Frankly, I’m still a little stunned by the tumult and puzzled by the discovery that transparency is an issue at all in a journalism organization.

  Lastly, I would thank, in advance, all parties for their hard work ahead at helping SND to re-stabilize and get on to becoming a more valuable tool for those of us visual types left plugging on in the industry.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 03:27 pm — Gina Dvorak (The Sun/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin in San Bernar)

• The real question is ‘Is the SND still any good to the rank and file?’ and the answer still unanswered. Has it become an elitist organization? you betcha

  Does it feel it has to answer to us common folk…I guess not

  Jun 16, 2009 at 03:34 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• This article provides a lot more information about the current state of SND and its future than anything addressed on the chat today.

  http://poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=165284

  There was no discussion of moving the headquarters to UNC and whether that related to Elise’s dismissal and Matt’s resignation. That would be a great question to answer.

  There was also no discussion of the status of moving the SND headquarters to UNC or somewhere else. Another great question to answer. Why is SND talking about moving its headquarters? What are the benefits of moving somewhere like UNC.

  There was a great deal of discussion about changing the bylaws from a lot of different parties and the current vice president. So here’s a question about that: when the bylaws have been basically the same for 25 years, why is it so important now to look at them? It was noted that progress would be checked on July 11, so that’s three weeks away. That would also be the time when you would be coming up with a ballot for this year’s election. It seems odd that after 25 years, there would be such a hurry to look at the bylaws with an election coming up, especially when any change would have to be approved by the SND membership. Why would looking at the bylaws be so important at a time when you are also searching for exec director and you just had your first presidential resignation in the organizations’ history? This is also coming at a time when membership has plummeted and more designers are being forced out of newsrooms every day. Why weren’t the bylaws important to revise two years ago? Why now?

  Jun 16, 2009 at 03:36 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Schneider—agreed.

  Here’s a question that wasn’t answered in the chat: if you are the vice president of the organization, why would you encourage the president to resign as you have helped to make the executive director leave?

  Jun 16, 2009 at 03:42 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• While the chat was a great idea, it appears many of us didn’t think it was much more than forward-looking statements. Yes, inquiring minds want to know—we want to know what really precipitated the resignations. We want to know what’s all the hubbub. And in an organization of journalists, we want the same transparency we seek from others. If the intent to avoid answering questions is to help keep the peace, it’s actually worse than laying out the answers. Sorta like when someone says “the coverup is worse than the crime.”

  That said, I’m still a member of SND (though the renewal forms are on my desk), and I’d like to help determine and be a part of our profession’s future. Who’s with me?

  Jun 16, 2009 at 05:09 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Doug

  I’m out. These people, of all people, should have understood the need for openness and honesty. A little straight talk would have been good. But no, the need to control the message over real information took over. It’s a shame.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 05:31 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Live chat=FAIL.

  Clearly they’re just gonna circle the wagons here. The only thing they MIGHT listen to is non-renewals.

  A very telling indicator: The fact that the “advisory committee” for the future consists ONLY of ex-presidents. All of whom, it should be noted, are well older (40+) than many of the members and others expressing frustration.

  Wish the task forces good luck if they have to run everything they desire past the elder council.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 06:12 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (TwinCities.com)

• In retrospect, a live chat may not have been the best format for thoughtful discussion.

  After all is said and done, there are some important questions on the table that members can reasonably expect to have answered, especially now that we read in a posting on Poynter’s web site that the fracas has led to the resignation of the president, media director, and a regional representative, and the termination of the executive director.

  These questions and concerns seem to resonate in almost all of the postings:
  • SND appears to be faltering at a time of crisis for our industry. Does the board recognize this? If the plan for the future is to continue the good work done by the former president and executive director, why are they leaving?
  • How can we include membership in setting goals for the organization?
  • How can the SND leadership better communicate with members? Can we produce a regular newsletter? A frequently-updated web site that’s a must-read for designers?
  • How can SND support members in transition? Shouldn’t training be more affordable for members (and more expensive for non-members)? Can SND help with job-finding skills? Start a health insurance fund like the one offered by the freelancer’s union?

  That said, I for one still think SND can be a valuable place for designers to exchange ideas, meet other people in the industry, and find out where we’re headed. After all the tough questions, count me in…

  Jun 16, 2009 at 07:15 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (The Boston Globe)

• We’re trained critics. We’re trained to ask questions, and most of these are good ones. I’m going to weigh in as a former member (sorry, unemployed) and also as a former regional director.

  We’re being quick to criticize and question what the members’ role in this is. I’ll tell you from experience, it’s HARD to get members involved. And, as has always been said, the membership has to actively participate to have a voice. We’re coming out of the woodwork now to complain about not knowing what’s going on and not being involved in decisions, but it’s a voluntary organization, run on free time. If you want a say or to help, you have to step up. The regional directors were created as a touchstone to keep members informed, but they are only as informed as members make them. Regional directors are your direct link and voice to the SND board, and I assure you, are open to all suggestions, ideas and comments about SND’s progress, mission and action.

  It’s unfortunate that it has taken this turn of events to bring us together, but it’s also a good time to see if you can make a change or offer a suggestion that might lead to something useful.

  When I can, I plan to renew my membership and stay involved and connected, and I hope to offer a perspective that will move the organization into the future, beyond the criticisms of the past and help it to better serve members. Please, communicate with your directors, it’s easier than ever.

  Jun 16, 2009 at 10:34 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (Chicago)

• Thanks, everyone, for taking the time to comment. We hear you, and are talking as a leadership team daily about ways to address your concerns and better meet your needs. Some excellent ideas have emerged here about how to expand our training and demystify decisions made at the board level. I hope this is just the beginning of the conversation.

  The answer to the question, “Why should I remain a member of SND?” is here: http://snd.org/join_snd/member_benefits.html

  One of the most rewarding benefits of membership is the opportunity to exercise leadership and expand your skills as an SND volunteer.

  The task forces forming now offer a new avenue for you to help set the agenda. We’ll have more information for you by the end of the week on who you need to contact to get involved.

  The task force chairs are fast-tracking the effort for the July 11 summit because some of their recommendations, like bylaw amendments, may require your vote in the September election. We need to make sure there is adequate time for two-way discussion. (To your question, Rob, none of those proposed changes would impact the way the fall election is conducted.)

  Here is a loose outline of what we expect to accomplish before July 11.

  • Board Structure Task Force: This group will examine the board org chart (great idea to post that, Robb) and areas of responsibility. They’ll make recommendations for realigning directors and programming against our strategic plan, adding new areas and expanding committees as needed. They’ll develop a stronger pipeline of volunteers who can serve in a variety of leadership roles. This group will also assist immediate past-president Gayle Grin in identifying candidates for the fall ballot.

  • Bylaws Task Force: This group will review the bylaws with a particular eye toward questions about leadership succession that arose with the president’s resignation. The role and scope of the executive committee needs to be more clearly defined. This group will revisit the presidential powers to make all board appointments and decide whether the executive director’s contract is to be renewed. And there are some questions about why some board positions have voting rights and others do not.

  • Executive Director Search Task Force: This group will organize a 6-8 member search committee, distribute copies applications to committee members, and possibly vet them onsite at the summer summit since the application deadline is July 10. They will determine who the final candidates will interview with and where. They will calculate search costs and work with the officers to account for the expenses with the board.

  • Strategic Planning Task Force: This group will work with the other three to giude recommendations along the lines of our long-term goals. This group will also concentrate on the membership issue, finding new ways to promote the value of SND membership, attract new members and retain current members.

  SND’s strength has also been as a member-to-member organization. As founding member and past president Richard Curtis has said, no one ever improved the world around them by withdrawing from it.

  So please join me in the effort to improve SND’s world by contributing to as many of these efforts as your time and energies allow. By this time next month, we hope to have a more specific blueprint of how the rest of the year will unfold.

  In the meantime, check back here for regular updates, and feel free to contact me directly any time.

  email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
  twitter: bburton
  facebook: BonitaBurton
  mobile: 321+663+9263

  Jun 17, 2009 at 02:21 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• My concern was that these task forces would affect who is running in the fall elections and who selects those candidates, and that sounds exactly what the Board Structure Task Force will do. I don’t think the immediate past president has needed a task force to help choose candidates before.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:07 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• I’d like to echo Doug Jessmer’s point in the LiveChat about SND possibly joining forces with other like-minded organizations.  When I look the alphabet soup of organizations I belong to, I’m increasingly not seeing much return on my money for SND, and I hate that because SND is part of the reason I became a designer 15 years ago.

  I think it’s important SND remain an independent group, but there could be something gained by holding Quick Courses and the annual workshop with like-minded organizations like NPPA, AIGA, SPD, ONA and others. Unfortunately, our professional organizations are as fractured and antiquated as our newsroom org charts. Forming something like Unity, held by the minority journalist organizations every four years, could be a huge draw since our jobs (for people who still have them) are becoming more cross-disciplinary.

  And it’s time SND offered more advanced training. The one Quick Course I’d registered for this year that went beyond basic HTML and Flash skills was canceled. It was the sort of course that would have been packed had it been offered in conjunction with South by Southwest Interactive and marketed to codeheads and designers who had never thought about working for a newspaper. It seems that SND members are clamoring to understand where they fit in on the Web, and I’ve found SXSW a wake-up call to new ideas and possibilities. If SND and newspapers are looking for new blood, then we’ve got to look beyond the usual suspects in J-school.

  As for all the bureaucratic inner workings of the SND board and the bylaws, I don’t understand what the problem is. All the controversy just reinforces the old criticisms of SND being a closed group.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 07:08 am — Eric Palm (Orlando)

• Let me see if I have this straight.

  Over here on the SND dude ranch, we found a fox hid itself beneath a chicken’s nest.

  And in response, we have blown the whole farm up, and now we are declaring that a victory?

  As a member whose entire SND career (dues, courses, competitions) has always come out of his pocket and not his organization’s, I am really insulted today.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 08:21 am — Josh Crutchmer

• Here’s something I don’t understand . . .

  Why the hubub over bylaws and board structure now? And why the extreme urgency to beat a July 11 deadline with it all? Yes, when reading through the bylaws on the site, they’re pretty vague. But they’ve been vague for a long time and radically re-organizing right now misses the point.

  This has come down to a clash of personalities within the board. You know what? That happens. You put a lot of people in the same room who care about their profession and there are going to be disagreements.

  And, specifically, there has been a clash of personalities between folks who were elected to serve.

  Here is my unanswered question to Bo (because she has now essentially undertaken a complete overhaul of SND): did you encourage Matt to resign? And, if so, since you say that you share his agenda, why?

  Task forces and blue ribbon panels don’t provide clarity.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 08:31 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (Chicago Tribune)

• Many of you feel that the live chat today was a failure. Many of you feel like there isn’t enough transparency in what happened to lead to all of this.

  But, if I remember correctly, we are always talking about how we want to re-shape the future and continue to be on the cutting edge of re-invention. Yet, when it comes down to personnel matters within the organization, we want to live in the past.

  Matt has spoken out on why he resigned. And, honestly, it is only his question to answer. It isn’t Bo, it isn’t Dorsey, it isn’t anyone else’s responsibility or choice to speak out about it. It was Matt’s decision.

  Did it catch everyone by surprise? Sure. Has Matt given a lot to the organization over the years? Undoubtedly.

  But, to make this personal about another member isn’t concentrating on where the organization goes from here, but it becomes a pissing match in who can scream louder from the top of Trib Tower.

  None of us want to see the organization in turmoil. None. This situation is unprecedented.

  So, instead of asking “Who said what?” or “Who screwed over who?”, why don’t we start asking, “How can I be a part of the future of this organization, and how can I help re-shape it?”

  Getting caught up in what happened in a board room doesn’t lead us into the future. It helps us stay in the past.

  Isn’t that what caused this dramatic slide in the first place?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 10:21 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (Orlando Sentinel)

• Bonita is taking some flack here, and if she’s the acting president of this sinking ship, she’s going to keep taking it. But speaking of “not helping the situation,” having a co-worker of Bonita’s, whom she recently called “one of the greatest hires Tribune Company has ever made,” if I recall correctly, sticking up for her here sure as hell isn’t helping either. We all know what that gives the appearance of. I’m sorry—we’re talking about transparency and cutting through the bullshit ... let’s do just that.

  I have seen nothing yet that has answered a few important questions. Steve’s question is a valid one: If as a member of the executive committee, Bonita was a part of the internal decision that ultimately led to the disagreement that ultimately led to the president’s resignation, did she then turn around and encourage the same president’s resignation? Or at the very least, did she do enough to stand in the way of it and talk him off the ledge? Because if this was truly a conflict that took place at the executive committee level that all members of that committee were in support of prior to all this stuff blowing up, then AS A MEMBER, I want to see the entire executive committee resign right along with Matt. And that includes you, Bonita.

  That’s what I want to see as a MEMBER. As a former exec committee member and regional director myself, it pains me to see all this happening. It reminds me of junior high. It’s freaking SAD and somewhat pathetic. 

  And if none of that is the case, then Lucy, you got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do to the members—that hasn’t happened yet. Now you have a membership that thinks yesterday’s live chat was a big joke. And you have a membership that thinks the post-mortem questions are being tip-toed around and being dodged.

  You’ve already lost me as a member come renewal time in August—the only thing you can do from here is make an attempt to get me back and hope that a bunch of other members don’t walk away with me. That can happen with up-front answers to a lot of these questions, because there’s a whole lot of people out there who think they’ve seen behind the curtain now, and they don’t like what they’ve seen. I’ll take my $105 elsewhere, and I’ll buy the winners book from Amazon, thank you very much.

  But it’s not too late to fix that—start answering some questions, and not just the ones that provide the most convenient answers.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 10:41 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• I agree we shouldn’t stoop to sniping about particular personalities. But I also think it is incredibly naive to suggest that seeking information about what has gone down in this organization is to “live in the past.” There has been a sharp and sudden tear in the fabric of SND at its highest level. It’s not time to simply move on.

  Bonita is in a tough position, though. On one hand, people are worrying about a vacuum of leadership. On the other hand, if she steps forward with too much too soon, some see her overstepping. What’s a VP to do?

  Regardless, the lack of transparency over What The Hell Happened is going to cripple the credibility and efforts of those trying to move forward, no matter how noble and sincere the effort.

  If an organization cannot be open and honest with itself—even at those times where it’s standing there with egg on its face about whatever—then there isn’t the foundation for much of an organization.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 10:42 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Past is prologue. We need to understand how we got here before we proceed, understand how something is broken before we can fix it properly. Does someone want to move something somewhere and someone object? What are the objections? Are we upset at how a paid employee is working out? Is the board or the president a bunch of name-calling yahoos doing a scene from Hamlet?

  How about it SND board? What are the the changes you want to make? No more organizational speak. Be plain, be blunt. Do you want to move the office? Do you want to change the focus? Do you want to take over the design world using nukes? Write it so even an old hack like myself can understand it.

  Try having a real conversation with your membership

  Jun 17, 2009 at 10:53 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• This shouldn’t be about personalities, and from reading the comments, I don’t think it is. Matt, Bonita, Tyson, Elise, and Bill all have our sincere thanks and admiration for the extraordinary time and energy they’ve dedicated to the organization and our craft.

  I agree with Nick and others who have written that we need to focus on the future of SND. But when we learn that the president, executive director, head of the foundation, and publications director all resigned because of disagreements with the Board about what that future should look like, isn’t reasonable to ask what the competing visions are? I think the Board might be pleasantly surprised to find out how much support there is among its members if they’d open the door to let us in.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 10:54 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (The Boston Globe)

• MattE…

  I appreciate where you are coming from.

  I made those comments based on how I feel about the situation at hand, whether it was Bo or anyone else taking the reins. I don’t think finger-pointing does any good at all. I have said this in many situations, about many people. What does it accomplish?

  Do I support Bo? Yes. But, as an SND member, I supported Matt, Gayle, Goldman, etc. as well.

  Instead of making this transition tougher, why don’t we try to use it as an opportunity to fix things so that this doesn’t happen again?

  And, for the record, I have stayed out of all of this stuff so that the appearance of bias toward Bo wouldn’t be obvious. But, at this point, it seemed as though some of SND’s biggest-name members were getting caught up in fingerpointing instead of what the future of SND is.

  Now is the time to have true influence. Now is the time to re-invent what SND can be and how it can help the industry.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:15 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (Orlando Sentinel)

• Seriously, whatever broke, could you guys just explain? It’ll make everything easier on everyone involved, especially yourselves.

  It’s not that hard. John Ensign just did it, and that guy’s probably running for president in 2012!

  It’s not living in the past, guys. Every one of you has worked at, or still works at, a newspaper. We’re asking for exactly what you ask of every source that ever gets printed in your paper: An explanation.

  I owe this group a career. And I want to support it. But you guys have to come clean.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:20 am — Ernie Smith (ShortFormBlog/Washington Post Express)

• I’d LOVE to focus on the future of SND. But again—my membership dues are right around the corner. Why do I want my $105 to go toward an organization that can’t even keep its board in place?

  As a member, I need to fully understand what took place to cause such a drastic and unprecedented response from a president that LIVED for SND like no other member I’ve ever seen. Because let’s just be honest here—if what happened internally on the board was bad enough for Matt Mansfield, the public face of SND for years even before he was an elected officer, to resign ... well, like I said, maybe this isn’t an organization I care to be a part of any longer.

  And if Matt resigned for just cause, I need to know that too—but I also need to know why so many other board members walked away or threatened to walk away with him. And not just “board members.” ELITE VOLUNTEERS for years and years and years.

  And then I need to know why Bonita also did NOT apparently threaten to walk away. I’m sorry. But it’s a question on a lot of minds and no one’s putting it in writing—people want to know what your role in this internal dispute was, Bonita. That needs to be answered. If you’re the acting president and possible president after the election this fall, then members need to know how we got to this point and what your role or non-role was in it. I would ask that question right now of ANYONE in this situation, be it you, Matt, Steve—anyone.

  This has become a political thing, and perception is often equated with reality. Right now, the perception that this whole thing is giving a lot of members is that the whole board blew right the eff up, and you just waltzed into the president’s job six months early. Again—if this was an executive committee decision that led to all of this, you were a part of that. What was your role in that original decision that led to the dispute, and what are your reasons for staying on board and not resigning along with some of your compadres? An honest answer to that question will provide a lot of insight to those of us who are members and who want to know how things are going to work going forward.

  My goal here is not to be a rallying cry to harm SND. I love SND. I’ve been a competition committee member, a competition coordinator, a workshop speaker and volunteer, a publications writer, an exec committee member, a regional director ... I don’t want to see bad things happen to SND. But dammit, as a paying member, this is bordering on infuriating.

  How can I send in my membership dues check in two months in good faith knowing that I’m supporting something that is working? It obviously is wayyyy broken right now. And the way things have gone the last 24 hours, I don’t have any faith that the leadership that has stayed on board is going to fix any of this.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:21 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• I question if this is the time for fast track committee work to examine the bylaws, the board structure, the executive committee make up and the ballot for fall.

  There has been a major rift in the board that no one will explain on the record to the membership. There has been a repeated reference to a blanket ‘need for confidentiality’ for board actions when the bylaws do not and should not grant the board the right to act behind closed doors on any and all issues they see fit.

  And right after a clear fight may not be the time to realign the structure of the government. It sure creates the appearance of an attempt to eliminate minority points of view under the guise of restructuring. 

  Are these the issues that will change the course of design in our industry? Is a fast track examination of the bylaws and board structure really what is needed to address the dramatic loss of membership and loss of design jobs? Or is it what is required to create a board where dissenting points of view are no longer welcome?

  And where is our elected president during all this important change? Well he resigned of his own free will to focus on his career as an educator, at least that is what we have been told. If that is truly the case then why would other members of the board also resign? It doesn’t make sense.

  So I ask again, did any of the officers or board members suggest to Matt he resign? As the members representatives we have a right to know what you are doing on our behalf.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:25 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Nick how can we ‘fix things so that this doesn’t happen again’ when we have never been told what happened in the first place?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:31 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Rob: The decision about candidates for elected office remains the past-president’s call. It’s an important decision that’s always made in consultation with the other elected officers, and the past president has always had a a nominating committee at their disposal.

  Eric, Doug: Finding new partnerships for training is something we continue to explore since last fall’s workshop held in conjunction with APME. Foundation president Bill Gaspard, who hosted that workshop,  has done a terrific job making sure SND is on the program with other journalism organizations. International director Hans-Peter Janisch has led several joint efforts between SND and IFRA. You’re right that there is more to be done, especially in the realm of the print-to-digital transition.

  Steve: This is not a proposal to completely overhaul SND. Some of these efforts are an extension of a day-long examination the board conducted in April of our long-term strategic plan. You’re right that we’ve been talking about the board structure and bylaws for years. It’s healthy for an organization’s bylaws to continually evolve (NABJ has a board position for Parliamentarian) But Matt’s resignation has raised new questions that need to be quickly resolved to ensure a smooth transition of leadership. With the election 90 days away, we need to begin that discussion now if there are to be proposed amendments on the fall ballot.

  As to where I stand on Matt’s resignation: The issues surrounding that decision were more substantial than a clash of personalities. The entire board, and Matt and I in particular, spent a lot of time weighing the impact of different outcomes. Resigning was a very difficult choice for Matt to make. I agree with Matt that his decision to resign was the right one, I respect him for making it.

  I understand how our efforts to keep details of those private conversations out of public forums have added to the confusion. We are talking as a board today about how we can better elaborate.

  I share Matt’s goals for a dynamic society that responds to the changing needs of its members, and I support the action steps he set in motion to take us there. The efforts he launched to identify a new executive director and a new headquarters home will continue to top the agenda. Matt has been very generous with his time and talents in assisting the board and being available to me.

  We have a lot of work before us, but we have a terrific leadership team in place. Again, I invite your participation as we make decisions going forward.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:46 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Not to pile on, as I know there are good people involved in this whole thing.

  But it seems like so far we’ve had a chat hosted by folks who didn’t actually want to say anything, and a lot of invitations to ask questions when clearly some questions aren’t welcome.

  I think there are a lot of valid, important questions right here on this comment board. And I suspect these questions, about what really happened and why, are going to have to be answered with some degree of candor before everyone will be able to move on.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:52 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Could there at least be an attempt to better explain WHY more information “can’t” be shared?

  This is not Britain. Board members aren’t dealing with the Official Secrets Act.

  And SND is not a competitive business guarding its market value and protecting trade secrets.

  So instead of going all Bartleby The Scrivener on everyone, why not get it all out in the open? Afraid more support might be seen for what you may or may not have just thrown in the Dumpster?

  Would leadership be willing to have a rank-and-file member sit in silently on today’s discussion and then relay to members an answer to one question: Was the interests of the membership at large what drove the conversation?

  That would be a tiny step toward openness.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:15 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Yeah, I pretty much am calling bullshit on this whole thing. At this point, no one on the board is stepping up to tell any of us anything that can be reasonably seen as anything other than careful politic-speak.

  “We have a terrific leadership team in place?” No one will even tell us who the hell is LEFT on that leadership team. Who else resigned? Who threatened to resign and still may resign? Who is taking the place of the people who resigned? ‘Cause from what we can all tell, some of the biggest participators in SND’s internal structure just walked away. And it’s not just as simple as they wanted to focus on other things. This isn’t personal? Bull. SHIT. Matt Mansfield, Bill Gaspard, Tyson Evans and others of that level of commitment to SND don’t walk away if it’s not personal. Which leads those of us from the outside looking in to question if it was personal due to who is left sitting in the big desk—because that’s all the information you’re giving us, and perception is reality until you prove otherwise.

  “I agree with Matt that his decision to resign was the right one”??? Why was it the right one? What led to it? And why would you NOT agree with it when you just got bumped up to the “White House”? I’m sure Gerald Ford agreed with Richard Nixon resigning, too. Do you agree with it because you DISAGREED with him on what led to his resignation? Do you agree with it because his staying on the board as president would’ve done more harm than good? WE ARE OWED LEGITIMATE, HONEST ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS and they’re still being side-tracked with carefully planned words.

  “Matt has been very generous with his time and talents in assisting the board and being available to me”??? Geez ... and we always claimed SND was a member-driven organization and not a bunch of politics. When this whole newspaper thing and SND thing finishes blowing up, it’s pretty clear we’ve got leadership in place that can get jobs writing speeches for senators.

  Do you think we’re going to read all this and not think this is all a big crock? I’m sorry if I continue to push the issue and come across as kind of a jerk here, but dammit—my membership dues year after year have earned me that right. My level of personal commitment to SND in the past has earned me that right. And I’m not gonna sit around and worry about hurting feelings anymore for friendship’s sake.

  WE NEED SOME HONEST ANSWERS, or there are going to be a lot of outcries for the REST of the leadership to go the way some of the others have chosen to go. I’m ready to call for that right now as a still-paying member, and I can guarantee I’m not alone.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:20 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Bonita writes “I understand how our efforts to keep details of those private conversations out of public forums have added to the confusion. We are talking as a board today about how we can better elaborate.”

  That sounds reasonable to me. It’s probably a good time for all of to take a deep breath and turn down the temperature until we know more.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:24 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (The Boston Globe)

• Bo,

  Not to parse this too finely, but it still doesn’t answer the question.

  Did you tell Matt he should resign? It’s not a matter of whether or not you agree with his decision.

  If you asked Matt to resign, and by extension got the resignations of the Foundation president, the publications chair and several other board members, it goes to why you should be serving as President and how I should evaluate my vote in the fall.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:35 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Some strong points.
  http://www.sportsdesigner.com

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:42 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (The Buffalo News)

• MattE. You are not alone.

  95 percent of SND is paying members who sit by and trust their elected leaders to do what’s right with their organization, their money and their competition entry fees.

  And for those 95 percent who feel like they’re being told “I’m on the board. You’re not. So deal with it plebian,” we’ve got three choices:

  1. Sit back and let it play out
  2. Demand a retention vote for the entire board
  3. Walk away from SND

  http://www.sportsdesigner.com/1/2009/06/snd-members-its-time-to-think-for-ourselves.html

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:52 pm — Josh Crutchmer

• The anti-SND sentiment of many of these comments makes me wonder why these folks care enough to participate in a chat about SND or add their comments here. I guess something about SND must be worth that time and energy.

  I see a lot of piling on from a group of people who could step up and volunteer their time to make SND what they think it should be—but they don’t. SND is not some exclusive clique. It is an ever-changing group of volunteers who donate their time, creativity, hard work and even a lot of money (no free workshop registrations, no paid airfare and hotel for board meetings, countless donations to SNDF) to help create SND’s programs, publications, Web site and more.

  If you don’t like what you’re getting for your dues, help us change it. Several of us on the board have spent a great deal of time trying to do that. Matt Mansfield has been a leader in that area.

  If you think SND hasn’t been doing anything for you lately, you haven’t been paying attention. Here are just a few examples:

  * New Web Design Boot Camp: Yes, they’re $300—but for two full days of hands-on personalized computer skills training, it’s an incredible bargain.
  * Meet-ups: Free training and networking opportunities.
  * Revenue 2.0: Major ideas for funding digital journalism. http://revenuetwopointzero.com/
  * update.snd.org: Many of you say there is nothing on this site. I beg to differ. Look at the archives. Now contribute.
  * Grants to Quick Courses for laid off SND members.

  It’s no coincidence that a few of the common denominators for most of these innovations were Matt Mansfield, Tyson Evans, Jon Wile and Bill Gaspard—all of whom have now resigned from the SND board. They will be sorely missed.

  I invite you all to get more involved. Call or e-mail the program directors with ideas for stories or training classes. Share what’s happening in your area with the regional directors. Write a story for update.snd.org. Host a meet-up in your city. Invent some new ways that we could create value for members of SND and spread our message.

  I have struggled with whether I can or should remain on the board. Part of me wants to walk away from an organization I no longer recognize. Part of me wants to stay and fight for the future.

  I will remain on the board as SND’s Education and Training Director for these reasons:

  * I feel an obligation to the SND membership to maintain my post and keep working to bring them a wide array of affordable quality training opportunities.
  * I feel a responsibility to the SND board to add my voice to discussions and votes that will shape the future of the organization—a responsibility that I feel even more strongly now.
  * I want an opportunity to help find and hire a new executive director to carry out SND’s mission.
  * I hope to show people why SND is a worthwhile organization and help spread its message.
  * I will not stand by and watch this organization that I love disintegrate. I want to be a part of the solution.

  Do not mistake my decision to remain on the board as approval of what has occurred over the last few weeks. I am outraged that a few individuals caused the resignation of a president who has contributed more to SND than most people will ever know.

  I hope you will join me in pushing forward to rebuild the SND in which many of us have invested so much of ourselves.

  For those of you who have asked for an account of what exactly happened, I have written something that I hope SND will send out to its members. Please stay tuned.

  Thank you.

  Denise M. Reagan

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:55 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• The board is compiling a statement now that will be released shortly. Please continue to pose any questions here, or to me directly, that it does not resolve for you.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:57 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• An old, false argument is rearing its ugly head again.

  It would be good to use caution when throwing around the “Step up or shut up” line.

  If a member of the U.S. Senate said “If the people don’t like it, they can run for office,” it would… not… stand.

  I’m sure most members and concerned observers are grateful to the thousands of hours of service performed by many in the society.

  However, to suggest that one who isn’t a volunteer, officer or a member of the Politb, er, presidential advisory panel has no justification for speaking out does nothing but reinforce the elitist charge the leadership detests so clearly.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 12:58 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• “The anti-SND sentiment of many of these comments makes me wonder why these folks care enough to participate in a chat about SND or add their comments here. I guess something about SND must be worth that time and energy.

  I see a lot of piling on from a group of people who could step up and volunteer their time to make SND what they think it should be—but they don’t.”

  Insult us for caring, having an opinion? We must not care as much as you do. We do not give as much as you do. You are special, gifted an elite who knows and understands so much more than us.

  You need to resign

  Jun 17, 2009 at 01:20 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Wes stated this well.

  When a certain former U.S. president’s actions were disagreed with, those dissenters were called “un-American” or “weak in the knees” ...

  Think about how hearing that made you feel before you go alleging these comments are “anti-SND” ...

  Jun 17, 2009 at 01:26 pm — Josh Crutchmer

• To put that another way: The people who this bothers the most are those who love SND and who worked a third of their lives and all of their careers to build it up, only to see it torn down from top to bottom in two weeks’ time.

  I think it’s a little harsh to call those people anti-SND.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 01:29 pm — Josh Crutchmer

• Denise, we’re friends. Don’t take this the wrong way.

  I’m not anti-SND. I’m very much pro-SND.

  I’m anti-What-SND-Is-Becoming/Has-Become.

  I walked away from my board position out of personal guilt for not doing enough with it compared to what members deserve. I had become what I had previously despised. The proper thing for me to do was admit it and walk away and give someone else a chance to lead a region.

  And now, as simply Joe Member, how am I to feel about the example that has been set from on high? When the most powerful volunteers in the organization and the most steadfast servants in its history walk away, then something’s rotten in the state of Denmark. That sends a pretty clear message to me as a member. And then hearing all the company line crap asking me to keep drinking the Kool-Aid is insulting.

  Sure, there are hundreds, thousands of people who want to see SND succeed and help build it. But guess what? Until we know what the hell just happened and why it done got broke to begin with, I can’t be personally certain that it’s something I care to spend the time and energy to help build back up. That’s where I know I’m not alone. I just happen to be confident enough to put it out there, and not everyone else is.

  Get down to brass tacks. Tell us who wanted whom out, tell us who fought back, tell us who caved and tell us why we should unite and stand behind the new leadership, because all of a sudden ALL of the rules have changed, and it sure reeks of something that deserves to have people feeling anti-SND if that’s the way the game’s gonna be played now.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 01:39 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Perhaps, just perhaps, many members have felt for a long time that the people running this organization were more interested in their own agendas, careers, desires than that of the regular folk, many at small newspapers, who were trying to learn their craft and do a better job with little time or resources. And perhaps that why all this bitterness comes out now. The poor designer working in the boondocks for $26,000 a year sees all this fancy crap about meeting in Barcelona or South America or inviting the designer of RAYGUN to speak and wonders what does this have to do with him. His editor will not accept it, his publisher will not accept it and if by chance he goes to one of those big fancy events, well he’s that hick from the boondocks. And now this anger has come home. The organization is no longer useful for moving up; there’s no moving up in this business… And Lynda is cheaper for training… as is poynter. What is the point.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 01:44 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• OK. Let’s talk about the future. The people who resigned have been pushing for a more open and digital SND. It has helped broaden the scope of SND and brought in people like myself. I would hate for their departure to hurt SND’s progress.

  So, here are my questions to help me decide about being a future SND member:

  • Can we expect to see an enhanced focus on preparing designers for this digital era?

  • Will SND continue to encourage more community-driven events, such as #sndchicago?

  • Can we expect more online innovation from SND, such as http://toolkit.snd.org/ or #rev2oh?

  • Will the organization become more open and transparent after this tide crashes?

  Thank you.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 02:06 pm — Yuri Victor (Gannett)

• This mess is looking more and more crazy. Up goes a chronology of events - and down it goes again with no explanation. 

  If something was factually wrong with the first version of the chronology I’ll be happy to correct it, but for now I’ll post it on another website, so people can read it, if they want to. I found it interesting.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 02:16 pm — Gert K Nielsen (visualjournalism.com)

• Gert, I noticed the disappearing post, too, when I went back to see if anyone else had commented on it.

  I also thought it was interesting and maybe shed more light on what was behind the shakeup, so I hope others get a chance to read that one.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 02:21 pm — Gina Dvorak (The Sun/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin in San Bernar)

• To hopefully inject a smidge of humor into this discourse, the running theme here brought back memories of a great scene from “The Breakfast Club” (sorry, couldn’t find the video clip):

  
  CLAIRE: I didn’t mean it that way!  You guys are putting words into my mouth!

  BENDER: Well if you’d just answer the question…

  BRIAN: Why don’t you just answer the question?

  ANDREW: Be honest…

  BENDER: No big deal…

  BRIAN: Yeah, answer it!

  ANDREW: Answer the question, Claire!

  BENDER: Talk to us!

  ANDREW & BRIAN: Come on, answer the question!

  BENDER: It’s easy, it’s only one question!

  CLAIRE: (screaming) No!  I never did it!

  Jun 17, 2009 at 02:22 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• My two cents: I think a lot more people would be willing to pitch in and help here if they had some idea what was going on. At this point, because the situation is so vague, it’s hard to tell what *would* help.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 02:53 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• All, as we were preparing the statement to be posted here, it was prematurely released as it was still being edited. It’s difficult to derive a group statement from any large group as you can imagine. We’re also trying very hard to react in near-real time to a topic we all consider very important. Thanks for your patience, we should be releasing it momentarily.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 03:07 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• It seems to be taking a long time to tell the truth

  Jun 17, 2009 at 03:14 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Let me restate that. It seems to take a long time to agree on the truth

  Jun 17, 2009 at 03:17 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• A few questions:

  1. Other than the elected officers, Gayle and Elise, who are the other members of SND’s executive committee? Bylaws say the executive committee also consists of one regional director, one program director and three directors from the Media/Journalism community at large who are not necessarily SND members. Need names, phone numbers and e-mail addresses.

  2. Where can I find minutes of the board’s meetings?

  3. Where can I find SND’s budget—and where financially the society stands?

  Thanks.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 03:28 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Why is it that everything Bonita puts her severed hand on goes haywire? As has been well-document on Charles Apple’s blog back in April, Bonita oversaw the destruction of her staff, and now she seems to be behind the rift on the SND board. Why do we need such a divisive figure as leader?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 03:59 pm — Guest

• The executive committee was:

  Matt Mansfield, President
  Bonita Burton, Vice President
  Steve Dorsey, Treasurer/Secretary
  Gayle Grin, Immediate Past President
  Hans Peter Janisch, International Director
  Melissa Angle, Region 3 Director
  Tyson Evans, Publications Director

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:07 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Bill Gaspard was often a guest of the Executive Committee.

  Melissa Angle and Tyson Evans were elected to sit on the Executive board at this spring’s board meeting.

  Previously, Don Wittekind represented the program directors and Matt Erickson represented the regional directors.

  A member from the Media/ Journalism community at large is Jacek Utko,an art director overseeing papers in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States.
  http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jacek_utko_asks_can_design_save_the_newspaper.html

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:39 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Melissa,

  Thanks. But Elise was a member of the executive committee, too, right? Bylaws say “Executive Committee of the Board of Directors shall consist of the Officers…” and her position, executive director, is parenthetically included in a list of “officers”.

  And why only one “director” from Media/Journalism community at large?

  What about society finances and minutes of meetings?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:42 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Gayle,

  What role as “guest” did Bill play?

  Did he ever officially vote?

  And as past president, you’d be able to answer my questions about finances and minutes.

  Much appreciated.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:45 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Of course, Elise Burroughs is also on the Executive Committee.

  We are in the process of finding other members of the media/ journalism community at large to be on the Executive Board.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:45 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• When asked, Bill offered his opinion. He sat in on the Executive Board Meeting as Foundation president.

  Elise updates all board members the minutes and the finances by e-mail.

  I will check if this information is also available on our website.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 04:57 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Hey, maybe Steve Dorsey—as the society’s secretary/treasurer—can answer my questions about society finances and minutes of board meetings.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 05:04 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Thanks, Gayle. I couldn’t find the info online.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 05:06 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Gayle,

  Sorry for all the questions. Just not up to speed on how either the board or the executive board operates. So I assume that past Foundation presidents also sat in on executive board meetings, too—just like Bill—right?

  Also, how often does the executive committee meet? And is notice given of those meetings?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 05:16 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• I must say. This goes well into my top five all-time dramabombs I’ve seen online and I can’t believe this came out of SND. I know the organization can recover from it, but as the replies pile up in my inbox, I can’t help but feel my heart sink more and more.

  Fingers crossed that we find a resolution for this sticky situation. We need it.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 05:17 pm — Ernie Smith (ShortFormBlog/Washington Post Express)

• Having this information online is a good idea for transparency to the board. This will be discussed for sure!

  Your regional director will also have this information.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 05:19 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Damon

  Thank you for your questions.

  Past Foundation presidents also attended the formal Executive Committe e meetings.

  The board and the Executive Committee have a 2 formal sit down meetings a year. They occur in the spring and fall. There is notice of these meetings. Every regional director and program director is required to attend and participate. 

  To further address the growing needs of our members, the past 2 years the Executive Committee have also had a weekend summit session during the summer.

  And there are countless conference calls with the Executive Committee and board members.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 05:33 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Gayle,

  So did Matt conduct a conference call with executive committee members when he decided he wanted a different executive director? When was the regular board notified that Matt was moving in a different direction (as was his right)?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 06:00 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• This is my last post. As a former member of the SND all I can say is SND looks a lot like the Mel Brooks governor in ‘Blazing Saddles” trying to save their phoney baloney jobs.

  There are other sites and organizations that cost less and do more and that’s where I’m going. I encourage all members to do this.

  Taking our ball and going to another web site is not as hard as you think. Let the Executive Committee and the past presidents play king of the hill all by themselves. It’s the only true way to get the elite’s attention.

  Until they decide to be more transparent with the decision making, and the money, go to Lynda for program training ($25 a month) and take some free Poynter online courses. Hang out with visual editors and say hi to Charles Apple (who is a nice guy). Join the Society of Publication Designers or some other design group (click on http://www.google.com/Top/Arts/Graphic_Design/Organizations/ for a list). Call the newspaper art departments of three cities next to you and invite them for coffee (Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus and areas in between… I’ve got a pot ready. Tell me when. I’ve got lots-o-stories of an old graphics hack with 25 years in this business).

  But don’t, don’t give these damn people the time of day or another dime. They have not earned our trust.

  Good bye

  Jun 17, 2009 at 06:19 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Gayle,

  OK, so I suspect you don’t feel comfortable answering some of my questions right now. I get that. But finances—I suspect they’re hurting with decreased membership, the state of the industry such that it is and some 4,000 fewer entries for the annual competition this past year—are something the membership has a right to know and the board has an obligation to provide. So please, open up the books.

  For instance, how much do we pay our executive director? What benefits do we provide the two paid positions?

  Also, with required attendance at two board meetings a year, I imagine that’s a strain on some of the regional directors, the majority of whom live and work outside the U.S. Does the society pick up any of their tab? Flight? Room? Board?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 06:30 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Gayle,

  While thinking about finances, maybe you could inform us all what the society is doing—given the global economy—to shore up finances and seek new revenue. What have been the results?

  As president, you did a terrific job of spreading SND goodness internationally. Are memberships up worldwide (minus the U.S.)? And are they offsetting the losses the society is experiencing in the U.S.?

  Jun 17, 2009 at 06:47 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Damon

  You are asking good questions and I will answer everything I can immediately. What I do not know I will find out for you and answer as soon as I can.

  Just be patient with me as I am juggling my day job deadlines right now too.

  Easy question first. Regional directors need to find sponsorship with their own papers or pay their own way. SND does not pick up any tabs for regional meetings. This year, most regional directors are paying their way out of their own pockets because their papers can no longer afford to pay their way.

  Membership is indeed growing internationally while it is slipping in North America. In this way we are more fortunate than other newspaper organizations. We benefit from global cross pollination as we grow internationally.

  I will do my best to answer your other questions soon. Must jump into my deadlines now.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 07:08 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• The much-ballyhooed Nick Masuda said “it seemed as though some of SND’s biggest-name members were getting caught up in fingerpointing instead of what the future of SND is.”

  Nick, ol’ boy, it’s hard to know where you’re going when you don’t know where you’ve been or why you went there. The questions are valid, though I don’t think there’s a whole lot of blamestorming going on. The evasion is deafening, and we journalists can smell something more. The carefully worded statements are suspect to many of us.

  My SND membership needs to be worth more than that. Hell, I’ve said ‘count me in’ to help, and dammit, I mean it. But first, lay out what happened, with a healthy respect for the membership—your peers in visual journalism.

  And even though I’m among the ranks of the unemployed (unless “stay-at-home dad” counts), and I may not renew in the most timely way, I’ll be here waiting for the call.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 07:15 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (St. Petersburg/Clearwater, Fla.)

• Damn deadlines!

  Maybe Matt can jump in and tell us if he conducted a conference call with executive committee members when he decided he wanted a different executive director. And if he notified the regular board that he was moving in a different direction. Maybe he can shed some light on why he wanted to go in a different direction—with some specificity.

  A few weeks back I sent Matt an e-mail complementing him on putting into place a very ambitious and thoughtful agenda for SND—grants for the web design bootcamp, the meetups, Rev 2.0. We all know he pushes hard and fast and the results are the stuff of legend. Am just wondering if he got ahead of himself, here. But I have no way of knowing.

  And I’d like to think that Mr. Dorsey could answer questions fully and honestly without vetting on the finance side of the equation. I mean, he’s a smart guy and he is the society’s secretary/treasurer. He’s qualified to speak to the membership. Am not asking for opinion, here, just the facts.

  SND is not a secret society.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 07:32 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Damon: We decided to go in a different direction on the executive director. I believed—and I continue to believe—that’s the right’s call. There are many skills a new director might bring to members. I also believe our office overhead’s too high and that members need to see what they are getting for the services provided by the paid staff.

  The Executive Committee, as a group and not me alone, decided not to renew the current director’s contract. It was our opinion that the Society needed someone with more digital skill and a proven track record of growing membership, securing grants, and establishing authority in the journalism community.

  I did convene a call with the Executive Committee to discuss the contract. It was a tough call and many of us were on the fence on how to proceed. In the end, we felt we had to look for new talent at a crucial time for the industry. That should make sense to anyone facing upheaval, which would be all of us as we daily confront the challenges of managing through a significant moment for journalism. No one said this was easy stuff.

  Given what’s happening in the industry, it’s also clear that the executive director position in any journalism association will be challenging and we thank Elise Burroughs for her service during a tough time. There’s no doubt, though, that because of the shakeup in the industry, the Society also has the benefit of a larger candidate pool than ever before. The ability to explore that option, we felt, remains the best course of action for the Society’s members.

  Look for the full board timeline that’s forthcoming. And keep an eye out for my last column as president, which will appear on this site tomorrow.

  Thanks for raising smart questions. And, to everyone else who has, I appreciate that as well.

  Trust me, I did what was best for SND, including this whole idea of stepping away at the behest of Bonita Burton and other valued board members (despite cries of protest from otehrs than I stay on as president) —and I continue to worry about and hope the best for the Society’s future. I left because it’s what I thought was right for SND and, as you can see from the acrimony out there (reported here, on Charles Apple’s blog and on Poynter), it’s a fairly divided group. I needed to try my best to help set that right.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 10:38 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• At 3:07 p.m., Burton said a statement would be released “MOMENTARILY.”

  The fact that nobody ever came back and said something like “You know what, guys? We’re still working on it. Because we want to get it right, we will post it at 10 a.m. tomorrow” is direct evidence that respect for rank and file members is an afterthought.

  If this kind of overpromise/underdeliver situation is representative of the new administration, it would indeed mark a low point for SND’s efficacy and stature.

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:42 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• For a well-reported version of events that we shouldn’t have to get from outside the society:

  http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2009/06/so-what-really-happened-with-snd/comment-page-1/#comment-31234

  Jun 17, 2009 at 11:43 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Thanks, Matt, for the clarity. It’s a start. I look forward to the chronology of events that led up to these past few frustrating days but I don’t look forward to your last column as president. I respect your decision to step away from your duties for the good of SND, but I would hope that cooler heads will prevail in the days ahead and that you finish your term as president. That may not win me bonus points with some members of the board, but I can deal with that. You have done much for all of us, you were elected and—guess what?—you now have some very essential issues raised by the membership in this blog that need to be addressed and fixed. And that’s the bottom line for me—it’s all fixable and you are someone I’ve known who can fix things.

  Start with transparency—as you have in your response here.

  Follow up by keeping the membership engaged—as it has been with this issue.

  And please embrace the perception that SND is an elitist society. Do not dismiss it out of hand. Perceptions are reality.

  Those issues and finding a new executive director should keep you busy in the coming months, and if the membership ain’t crazy about how you and other officers have conducted themselves, they can vote your successor and hers out of office this fall.

  Again, thanks for your answer above. It is appreciated as has been your remarkable service to the society and to the industry.

  Please stay and get back to work. There’s much to be done —for the good of SND.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 12:21 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Wow, this is overwhelming just trying to follow along from the outside. I can only imagine how stressful it must be for the folks directly involved.

  While I really am in favor of transparency and feel there are some valid questions being asked, this has all unexpectedly caused me to reflect the last day or so on how SND — and really, by that, I mean the people in SND — has impacted my life over the last decade or so.

  I thought I’d briefly share some of these thoughts and feelings, not to distract from these issues, or to take sides, or to try to “kiss up.” Anyone who has spent much time around me knows that not only do I hate playing politics, I completely suck at it. So I have no agenda. I just thought I’d share these reflections, rather than keep them to myself, in the hopes it might help us remember some good things during a period of very high tensions.

  Thanks to SND, and thanks to many of the people involved in this debate in one way or another, I have found more opportunities, made more friends and learned more over the last decade than I ever would have imagined when I got my first newspaper job and wasn’t even aware that there was such a thing as newspaper “design,” let alone an organization dedicated to it.

  When I knew absolutely nothing and had everything to learn, the people in SND people embraced me as a friend, taught me how to get better as a designer and a journalist, and helped me make connections — in turn, creating opportunities — I’m certain I would not have found otherwise. Even this year, the SND Foundation gave me a grant to help me learn some online skills when I lost my job.

  If every newspaper failed tomorrow and I had to go into a completely different line of work, I would still feel certain that SND was an overwhelming contributor in my run as a newspaper designer. I’ve enjoyed the hell out of it, and it’s impossible to separate out SND from that positive experience.

  So whatever the future holds, and whatever comes of this divisive issue, I just wanted to speak up and say thanks to the Society and thanks to so many friends that I’ve made by being a part of it.

  At this point, I honestly feel that I owe SND way more than it owes me. My membership lapsed recently due to an unexpected job change and sudden changes in our finances. But I plan to renew. It may be a small gesture of faith, but it’s the absolute least I can do after all the ways I’ve benefitted from being part of SND.

  For the board members and other folks caught up in all this, regardless of what happened or what side you’re on, thanks for all your hard work and dedication. I hope it starts to get easier for you very soon!

  Group hug anyone?

  Jun 18, 2009 at 12:38 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Thanks, Damon, for pushing the big issues here with some very straightforward questions. I think we all look forward to reading the answers, and hope that happens soon.

  Thanks, Matt, for a little more light on things, and again for your years of service and dedication to this organization.

  And, last but not least, thanks to Charles Apple for digging in on this story. It helps.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 12:58 am — Gina Dvorak (The Sun/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin)

• Chris, posting today was our intent and I’m sorry for the poor job communicating as the conversation (which went all afternoon past 1 a.m.)  wound on. I, of all people, didn’t want you having to read details on other sites before reading it here first. You deserve better than this from us. The timeline will be posted here by noon.
  Is it contentious? Yes.

  Was there dissension in our board? Most definitely.

  Does that extend to Matt and I? Yes. We came to very different conclusions about the magnitude of the situation he created.

  Did I force him to resign? After walking through the ramifications with him, I definitely landed in the camp strongly encouraging it.

  Do I feel good about how this has played out? This whole situation makes me just sick. Our generous partners at UNC, our hard-working executive director, our indefatigable board, our revered founders, our loyal membership - we’ve let them all down.  “Trust me” is now a harder request for any future SND president to make.

  We have much to do to restore the faith, I’m working my butt off around the clock to make that happen. I won’t speak for the society while Matt is still president, but I’ll speak for myself in saying I am so, so sorry to be at this low place.

  Two weeks ago, as this was all exploding, I was in the hospital after a horrific accident. Part of my right hand was chopped off before my eyes. It’s an inconvenient and difficult time for me to contend with this SND challenge. It’s a difficult time to be a time-starved volunteer on our board and have to give even more. It’s a difficult time to be a visual journalist desperate for help in inventing your future, wondering where you can turn.

  Turn to us. Give us a chance to reinvigorate the talent base. We will get the organization back on track. We will improve our ability to help you become a better journalist and advance in your career. We will listen to your criticism and respond with urgency.

  If we fail, you should do as Damon suggests and vote accordingly this fall. In the meantime, I’m organizing some key task forces and could use your help.

  .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

  Jun 18, 2009 at 02:12 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Here’s another call for an open airing of the facts from past-president Neal Pattison. It was sent to the advisory panel and shared with our board today.

  SND friends and colleagues:
  During our teleconference last week, some people expressed a preference for withholding the details of the board dispute. The reasons seem to range from
  pragmatism (it will be better for SND’s reputation) to paternalism (our members only care about workshops and contests, why inflict these details on them?)

  I think these opinions are well-intended and reflect a desire to protect SND. But I cannot concur.

  I’ve spent more than 35 years in newspapers. I started as a reporter, photographer and editor. I embraced design and graphics because I valued them as tools for helping citizens understand news events. But, for me, it
  has always been about journalism.

  I have often dealt with public boards and elected officials who want the newspaper to keep their business bottled up and out of view and earshot of the taxpayers. “Nobody cares about this stuff,” they tell us. “It will just
  cause more conflict and hard feelings,” they insist.

  Well, newspapers work for the citizens—the taxpayers—not the public officials. We all know that.

  And SND’s “taxpayers” are its dues-paying members. And it is not up to the board to decide what facts they do or don’t deserve to know about its actions on their behalf—outside the exemptions generally recognized under law (i.e. personnel).

  My advice: Be transparent. If members really don’t care, their lack of push-back will affirm this. If they do care, then they have the right to know.

  If SND wants to embrace the best values of journalism, it has to embrace this kind of transparency—even if it’s uncomfortable or causes hard feelings.

  Just my two cents.

  Neal Pattison
  Executive Editor
  The Herald
  Everett, WA

  Jun 18, 2009 at 02:48 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• (posted here with Neal’s consent)

  Jun 18, 2009 at 02:49 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Bonita,

  Thanks for contributing to the discussion. If someone suggested you forced Matt to resign, that would have been a stretch, right? As I read our bylaws, the VP doesn’t have such powers. The VP, as I understand, serves on both the board of directors and the executive board, and “It shall be the duty of the Vice President, in the absence or inability of the President to act, to exercise all the powers and discharge all the duties of the President. “

  Also, Matt says above that the executive committee, of which you are a member, decided—in regards to the retention of the executive director—that “we had to look for new talent at a crucial time for the industry.”  Did you know Elise’s tenure was being debated? How did you vote on that?

  Thanks.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 02:50 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Yes, that’s right, Damon. Only the board can remove an officer through a majority vote. The decision to resign was Matt’s. It was a difficult decision for him to make, I agree with him that it was the right decision for SND. I respect him for making it. 

  While the board appoints the executive director and approves the job’s compensation, the decision to renew the executive director’s contract rests solely with the president. Matt counseled with the executive committee as he went back and forth in his thinking, but there was no vote on the matter. ( I hope the bylaws group will revisit the thinking behind that before we fill that position.)

  I knew in December that Matt was debating Elise’s contract, they were due to discuss it in January. That month Matt asked me to coordinate the search effort, and by February I had confirmed a search committee of the officers and five other members.

  I supported his decision to explore what kind of talent was available.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 03:23 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Bonita,

  A couple more questions before I hit the hay:

  If Matt does resign, you will take on his responsibilities as president. Will you be looking to replace Elise?

  The bylaws are a little confusing to me on this issue: Will you be able to name directors to replace those who have resigned? Will you be able to fill the vacancies on the board of directors that existed before the recent resignations? Can you name people to the executive board? If not, can the board govern?

  Sorry for all the questions, but this is feeling a bit like a a Constitutional crisis to me.

  Again, thanks.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 03:23 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• The officers hotly debated the issue of whether to renew the executive director’s contract. We talked about things for a long time and to say I made the decision alone and in January is a pretty wild reading of things (ask Gayle Grin, who was my wise counsel during that period). We did a contract extension at that point to the end of the year based on conversations about the Society’s future. Several people were not sure of the path ahead, myself included. We needed time to sort it out.

  Did I ask Bonita to form a search committee in February? You bet.

  Was the decision final then? No way. Though maybe Bonita believes it was.

  As we worked through the spring, things became murkier and we had Executive Committee discussions on the path ahead. Bonita knows that.

  And she also knows that, contractually, we cannot discuss specifics on the terms of those deliberations.

  As for a new director, Bonita did support the decision to look for new talent.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 05:01 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Do I think SND can get back on track? Yes. That’s why I joined Bonita in the united front you have seen trying to repair things for SND.

  But I also know that the current leadership, myself most of all, made mistakes along the way. We should have informed UNC sooner when we took a different path on the director. I’ve apologized repeatedly for that.

  I do think things spiraled way beyond where they should have gone, taking countless hours of time and energy. In the end, my plan was to walk away to help this board try to find a way to lead. Instead, it became more fractured.

  Yet that’s also a good thing for SND. All the issues that people are raising here in the comments are the right ones on the direction of SND, how it’s supposed to work, and how it has to evolve as members confront change in the industry and the challenge, as well as the opportunity, of new tools for storytelling in news design.

  This year, I have devoted my presidency to finding ways that SND can be relevant. Guess what? We still have a lot of work to do. Being together on the path has been and remains a significant focus of my life.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 05:19 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Maybe this can help:

  “How to redesign the Society for News Design.”

  http://bit.ly/y3JRp

  Jun 18, 2009 at 06:12 am — Robb Montgomery (Visual Editors)

• Bonita (2:12): Fair enough. Thanks for addressing the lack of comm. Will chill and look forward to timeline drop later today.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 07:40 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• The draft minutes of the April 19, 2009, board of directors meeting are posted in the members-only area of http://www.snd.org. As is customary, they will be approved at the next board meeting, Sept. 23, 2009, in Buenos Aires.

  Also, following Buenos Aires, the next Annual Workshops will be Sept. 23-25, 2010, in Denver and Sept. 29-Oct. 1, 2011, in St. Louis. Jun 18, 2009 at 03:53 p.m.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 04:38 pm — Dorsey (Detroit)

• Damon: The executive director search was launched last week To answer your other question, it will be my responsibility through the end of the year to exercise all the powers and discharge all the duties of the president. That includes making appointments. Bill, Tyson and Jon leave enormous shoes to fill. I hope to have new oversight of the areas they directed so well sometime next week.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 05:43 pm — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Friends,

  I begin to think why Matt resigned, and why Elise is leaving, and why it takes so long to answer all the whys, all quickly become irrelevant questions. No time to waste here.

  The only relevant question is: WHAT MUST SND BECOME not only to survive, but to remain relevant—and help journalism thrive in whatever form it takes in coming years.

  Some thoughts, more from outside than in these days:

  1. SND must represent the brightest thinking focused on innovation in communicating the news. Typeface du jour? Web width of the month? Hell, no. Attracting *and engaging* news consumers and enabling communities around the news? Oh, yeah! Can SND honestly say it holds any industry leadership position there? Ask your publishers. Ask your interactive leaders. Hell, ask your editors. I don’t think the answer will be what you want to hear from any of them.

  2. SND needs about half the legislative overhead—and about twice the revenue streams to reinvest in Item 1 above. That means: smaller board, more functional/less celebratory annual workshops (I’m living proof they’re possible), less charity on pricing at the high end (veteran professionals) so it can offer more charity at the low end (students and newbies).

  3. SND needs to recognize that “being international” does not require the financial and emotional drain of spreading workshops around the world. Global chapters can and do hold their own events, and they’re much more cost effective than all the trade-offs the society endures to move the big event away from its largest membership base in North America. We have entered an age of instantaneous global communications at incredible fidelity. Important strategic messages, best practices and just plain great work can be shared easily without face-to-face. All the offshore workshops do is put a very expensive exclamation point on the sentence that says “international.” The media business can’t afford to waste time or money that way.

  4. HQ needs to be either in academic or professional quarters, probably wherever the new exec director resides. Negotiate leases with the nearest J-school or nearest newspaper, either of which nowadays is likely to have office space and shared services at bargain prices.

  5. The interactive training and competition are, well, OK. But interactive is headed in a profoundly different direction than Flash graphics. And again, SND has almost no voice among the interactive leadership of most media companies. You get that when you start focusing on holistic user experience: news, information, advertising, community, interactivity, data, and THEN visualizations. Remember that while SND regulars worry about elaborate feature page spreads, the world has turned the basic unit of communication into 140 characters of text (a tweet or social status message). How does SND apply to that?

  6. SND HQ needs respectable Web content management, tied to a respectable CRM system for membership management, tied to an enterprise-grade database management system for the competition(s), events, job bank, portfolios, all the stuff that sat in lil’ ol’ FileMaker all those years. I know it too well—a lot of it still looks like guts of the stuff I built on the fly in, oh, 1997. And that scares me, too.

  7. Which leads me to: SND needs to pay better than a living wage to its exec and staff, because managing all that stuff and cat-herding the board, officers and members (admit it, this is the most vocal and emotional group you’d ever expect to have to manage, right?)—well, that commands a salary and bonus plan that will attract top talent.

  All right, I’m done. I still pay for my membership. And I’ll keep paying, I think, because I genuinely like the people behind SND and want to see it thrive again. But please hurry. And waste no more time than necessary airing the laundry.

  Thanks for hearing me out.

  —j.

  Jun 18, 2009 at 09:21 pm — Jay Small (E.W. Scripps Co. and Small Initiatives)

• Jay inspires me to think forward as well (not that some of the other gunk doesn’t need to be hashed out).

  One critical focus and mission for SND that I don’t think Jay or others have brought up thus far: In this era of cutbacks and consolidation, we visual journalists have a HUGE battle in simply justifying our function and value internally.

  Across a panicked industry, the print product is being unceremoniously shat upon in the interest of cutting costs. In a belated and not-well-though-out stampede to online focus, there’s a general thought you simply need “boots on the street” (reporters), lots of technology and automation.

  Design and copy-editing are considered “production” not journalism—and cutting production costs is the mantra everywhere (particularly if it can be viewed as a way to “protect content gathering.”

  In large part, it’s clear that the visual journalism Kool-Aid that the industry gratefully swallowed back in the Happy Days, is now being hocked up in budget-slashing sessions in many a boardroom.

  To a degree, we are hampered by the fact that “design” and “pagination” have often necessarily been wedded. For every highly trained act of visual journalism a designer performs each day, there are still probably more hours dedicated to the simple processing of a page (which, yes, can be done by lesser trained and lesser paid people, on or off site).

  So the challenge for SND: How do we reintroduce ourselves and our value? How do we translate that value to online—where automation and template-driven sites are the norm? Are video and slideshows and Flash interactives our only shelter?

  As Jay suggests in his Item 1 above, our entire focus perhaps needs to be redefined—and reintroduced to executives in a way they will buy into. Perhaps “visual journalism” and “design” are the wrong words for us to define ourselves. “Information development” or “information architecture” may be more the needed focus.

  Portfolios and contest books that are, essentially, galleries, may prove a disservice to us. Focusing on WHY a page or package functions well should be central. Has an SND annual ever provided that?

  Sorry, rambling a bit. But my bottom line is that we have a huge, immediate and desperate need to prove our value INTERNALLY in this industry.

  Jun 19, 2009 at 09:08 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• It was suggested to me that my comments below from the chronology thread be added to the larger discussion here.

  ————————————-

  
  We had a timeline that was published, then retracted so it could be edited. Correct? Who did that editing?

  Did the vice president and soon-to-be acting president have a very heavy hand in the editing of that timeline? Because the new timeline sure seems to be a lot more critical of Matt Mansfield than the original one—or any original claims the board had made.

  So why the fresh new spin, and why the fresh new spin that seems to be even more damning toward Matt, especially now that he has resigned? Certainly everyone says they want to move on, but this reeks of “Let’s move on, but let’s make sure everyone believes Matt was at fault and resigned out of guilt so we can look better going forward.”

  As a former board and executive committee member, I can assure you—no WAY is Matt Mansfield the full-on villain in all of this that he is being portrayed as. Matt is taking the fall for something that the board and executive committee, especially, should be taking the fall for collectively. As president, Matt is the face of SND, but he did not act alone.

  The timeline mentions Matt being untruthful and not giving full disclosure to UNC, the exec committee, etc. Was that truly done to deceive UNC? The board? The members? How about the conversations that took place behind the scenes, the backroom deals, between those calling for Matt’s resignation? Conversations that I’m sure included Bonita at some point? Aren’t those just as bad? Read between the lines very carefully in that new timeline, and you’ll see other things happening that are even worse than these resignation-worthy acts from Matt. As members, we are getting only one side of this story. Matt’s resignation column is polite to a fault. It’s professional. He’s not going to publicly throw those who have screwed him under the bus the way they’ve done to him.

  Is Matt blame free? I don’t think so. He could have and should have handled it a little differently. But is it as bad as it’s being portrayed? No way. It never should have escalated to this point. And there’s a pretty clear reason it did escalate.

  Bonita Burton is not without fault in this situation—far from it, especially as vice president and as an executive committee member. And especially if this situation has been one that she is using as a way to achieve quicker and further authority within the Society. If she personally had a hand in taking down the original timeline and editing it to reflect further negativity on Matt, then as a journalist who is a member of a Society supposedly run by and for journalists, I would say without question ...

  ... Bonita’s actions are positively conduct unbecoming of an SND leader. Actions speak loudly, and the actions we’ve seen are that while her words say her interests are in moving SND forward and working with Matt for a smooth transition, the underlying goal is that of a shark smelling blood in the water.

  I believe her actions—or non-actions, as the case might be—are possibly on a greater scale, even, than anything Matt was accused of that led to his resignation. And be certain—despite the spin, this was a force-out, not a resignation. This was a ganging-up-on by some opportunistic people, and now it’s being aired publicly.

  It’s been alluded to by others, and no one is flat-out saying it. I will. I have no agenda to push. I’m no longer on the board or executive committee. Matt worked with me in Munster for about 20 months at the start of my career, and since then we’ve been colleagues who see each other at workshops and judgings and nothing more.

  I believe that if Matt Mansfield was pushed toward resignation by Bonita Burton and other members of the Society’s board, and that action caused his resignation, the resignation of other high-ranking board members and threats of resignation by others, that Bonita Burton should resign her leadership position with the Society for News Design effective immediately.

  Jun 19, 2009 at 11:36 am — .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

• Someone posted a reply to Jay’s comment here (it’s in my e-mail updates), but I don’t see it anymore, which is really too bad. I hope it reappears. Responding to the top item on Jay’s list, it talked about “reintroducing ourselves,” transformation to online, etc. Shifting the focus of what designers do for the print product and operation as a whole, and how they can prove themselves valuable as newspapers continue scaling back.

  I posted the comments below in another string, but I’ll repost them here as well. They, too, go to item #1. I post them here now as this comment string still seems to be reaching the broader audience.

  Forgive me if these are repeats from others earlier as I haven’t yet read through some of the lengthier posts. Here goes:

  
  When trying to figure out the best place to post the rest of this comment, I was wondering if it might not be a good idea to start an “idea chain.” At a time when I feel like the folks in charge of this organization are listening more intently than ever, SND might be best served by creating and promoting a central landing spot for all the ideas yet to come, then branch off from there as needed. (There’s quite a few branches that could be peeled from the comments made in the last few days, no doubt.)

  ***

  In all honesty, news about the 2010 and 2011 conferences really made me feel optimistic about this organization’s future. Even though the time is yet distant, I see how they can do so much good. Central U.S. locations: Not so convenient for our international friends, true, but perhaps more easily attended by those from every corner of the U.S. So much potential ahead…

  ***

  I’m also wondering, amid all the transition and metamorphosis that will be going on within this organization in the near future, if it’s not worth reaching out to other organizations for journalism professionals in as many ways as possible. For example, partner with other organizations to:

  * Offer combined registration discounts. Such as… Join SND *and* NPPA for $120; join SPJ and get $40 discount on your SND membership, etc. Register and attend the ACES conference and get and additional $100 off the SND conference. And so on. You might even find your membership numbers increasing that way.

  * Team up for workshops. SND can be valuable to more than designers. One of the biggest challenges I face as a design editor of two newspapers is that I can’t be two places at once. Which means I often need to rely on reporters to see the visual potential for their own stories, for photographers to see beyond the everyday centerpiece play. Off the top of my head:

  >> Invite ACES to help put on a short course on alternative story telling for reporters. Educate them on the benefits of visuals while opening their eyes to different methods of presenting the information they’ve gathered.

  >> Partner with NPPA to offer a workshop on photo illustration and art direction—and even better stuff I’m too tired to think of right now.

  ***

  As newsrooms continue tightening, and everyone gets fatigued about having to do more with less, this is a golden opportunity get totally different skill-sets in the same room and help them—us—all learn how to talk to each other, interact and work together more effectively to turn out something much better than either could do alone or without the support of the other. I can’t imagine anything more valuable to ourselves, our publications and, most importantly, our readers.

  Thanks for reading.

  Jun 19, 2009 at 12:43 pm — Gina Dvorak (The Sun/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin in San Bernar)

Submit a comment

Flickr photos »

Tag your photos sndbue.