More than one SPJer has asked me if the LDF auction switch was ethical, and if SPJ's Ethics Committee has weighed in.Officially, it hasn't. But the head of that committee is Andy Schotz, who's also the DC chapter president. Andy recently signed an open letter from his board that replies to similar letters from the New York and Long Island chapters. Since Andy takes SPJ ethics seriously, I can't imagine he would've signed this letter if he felt any part of it was unethical.
The letter opens squarely on the side of the Executive Committee...
The Washington, D.C., Pro chapter was contacted recently by the Deadline Club of New York City about this year's SPJ's auction switch, making the Terry Harper memorial fund the beneficiary instead of the Legal Defense Fund.
While the Deadline Club and the Press Club of Long Island have requested that the switch be nullified, the D.C. Pro board does not agree. We support having the proceeds of the auction benefit the memorial fund. (Splitting the proceeds between the LDF and the memorial fund seems like a good idea, but we have been told this is not possible.)
But it also gently chastises those same EC members...
However, we have a few comments and observations about the process.
The fact that the LDF is healthy and won't suffer from a year off is important and persuasive information. That should have been conveyed to the membership at large at the same time the switch was announced, rather than several weeks later, after the decision was challenged.
It also would have been better to involve the LDF Committee in the discussion about switching beneficiaries of the auction proceeds. Committees are advisory, but should get the chance to at least comment on decisions that affect them and their work.
The LDF Committee chair and vice chair told our chapter they didn't mind the switch. In the interest of good communication and collaboration, one or both should have been consulted. That might have defused, or at least weakened, any challenges to the switch.
Dave's letter also made a good point that legal defense fundraising will still happen at the convention, although in a different form. That is another important detail and should have been explained to the membership as soon as it was decided.
It's hard to argue against the efforts to honor Terry Harper. More thorough communication would have been helpful in this case and is a good practice in general.
I think the DC board response has something both sides can embrace — and reject. But there's more to the story. I hope to get to that later.
WEDNESDAY: SPJ ethics in action.
