1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

enough about conflict of interest, let's see some APSE results!

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by spankys, Feb 25, 2008.

  1. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    Who voted? How did that work?
     
  2. FreddiePatek

    FreddiePatek Active Member

    Regional chairs and past presidents ... I don't think there were any others.

    And, no, Jim Jenks did not have a vote!
     
  3. hwkcrz1

    hwkcrz1 Member

    There were 12 total voters. It was a 6-6 tie, so it didn't pass.
     
  4. Jim Jenks

    Jim Jenks Member

    Thanks, Freddie. :)
     
  5. That's all you have to add to the discussion Jim?
     
  6. Jim Jenks

    Jim Jenks Member

    If I had voted, I would have voted for the changes. As president, I asked Micco to look at the contest categories because I thought it was not right that there were only 30-something entries in the over 250,000 categories and so many in the small paper class. My goal was to have a more equitable number entries in each category.
     
  7. printdust

    printdust New Member

    We're talking about one classification addition. One.

    From what I hear, it was the big boys who decided they weren't going to pay bigger dues for adding an extra section.

    And if you're a member of APSE who last year wanted to see how to become more relevant to small paper membership, then shut the fuck up. You're as clueless as to how to do that as the penny counters are who say newspapers need to be more relevant, and emphasize local, then cut local resources. APSE is hypocritical and just needs to say it represents the interest of 100,000-and-up papers who still can sacrifice the staff member to go judge without bringing the production of the section to a half.


    Let me amend that. If you're one of the six who voted against this, then don't ever come in and talk about how you want to encourage membership and connection to the small guys.
     
  8. printdust

    printdust New Member

    Well it's good to know that 12 people speak for all the membership.

    This thread has assured it for our paper. We won't be renewing. I'll find ways to spend with Poynter and other places for benefits (and I do mean other than contests). This is a waste of our time considering our resources and why shouldn't that be a surprise? It's decisions made by newspaper people who have been trained by their handlers to blow themselves and their industry to hell. Servant leadership? My ass.
     
  9. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    Fixed.
     
  10. Thanks for the response, Jim.

    How about your thoughts on the conflict of interest?
     
  11. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Curious about some of this. If a paper is 200K daily and 350K sunday, it is in different categories for daily and sunday or is it just considered over 250K?

    Would that affect the number of over 250Ks? What I mean is are there more over-250Ks in the Sunday contest than the Daily and Special contest?
     
  12. FreddiePatek

    FreddiePatek Active Member

    Just thought I'd save this thread from careening into the ditch ... again.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page