IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT (OF SPJ)

The nation’s largest journalism organization has a big problem.

The Society of Professional Journalists is led by a crazy woman. Seriously, SPJ’s president is insane. She talks nonstop. She also interrupts and insults nonstop.

How do I know this? I’m SPJ’s longest-serving national board member. Saturday afternoon, we held a virtual meeting that fireballed right away.

Don’t believe me? Watch my supercut of crazy. And trust me, it gets crazier the longer you tune in…

It’s not even important to know what we were debating, which was solely about who should chair a committee. The board of directors innocuously wanted one person, but president Alex Tarquinio wanted another – and she went thermonuclear over it. Which is SOP for her, SOL for us.

What crazy costs

Before you ask…

No, I’m not violating any confidences here. SPJ posts videos of its board meetings, although this latest shitshow isn’t there yet.
Yes, I’ll catch hell. Even though SPJ meetings are open, and even though we’re journalists who cover other people’s shitshows, SPJ leaders usually condemn me when I “air our dirty laundry.”

So why am I exposing SPJ’s soiled sheets right now? Because Tarquinio has been president for nine months, and we’ve tried everything to deal with her. Nothing has worked. She’s only getting crazier.

Meanwhile, SPJ’s membership has dropped 13 percent during Tarquinio’s term. SPJ will soon conduct interviews to hire a new executive director – and Tarquinio has named herself to the search committee. That means her megalomania could hobble SPJ far beyond her term, which ends in September.

I don’t think SPJ can survive that long.

Impeaching the president

SPJ’s bylaws, like any organization’s, allow for removing leaders who aren’t doing their job…

Article Seven Section Six. The board of directors may declare any national office or the position of any director vacant if the board determines the incumbent has failed to perform the duties of the office or no longer meets the qualifications for the office.

Such action shall require approval of two-thirds of the members of the board. Any elected person whose removal will be considered shall be notified in writing 14 days in advance that the board may take such action. The national board shall notify all campus and professional chapters of that meeting 14 days in advance.

If you watched the video, you might wonder why we didn’t oust Tarquinio long ago. The simple answer: SPJ’s board of directors is comprised of mostly nice people.

They’re also smart people. Without compelling evidence of crazy, SPJ leaders would create more problems than they’d solve by toppling Tarquinio. But Saturday, she played all her greatest hits, for all to see.

So starting today, I’ll contact as many SPJers as I can. I’ll ask them to watch this video. If they agree Tarquinio must go, that’ll give SPJ’s board the noble motivation – and political cover – to get rid of her.

Last hurrah, last gasp

And if this doesn’t work?

Well, I tried. If SPJers want to stay the course, I’ll shut my mouth. My time on the SPJ board ends in September. I’ve served since 2008 – with one year off to preserve my sanity – and I’m not running again.

I guess you call this going out with a bang.

29Comments

Add yours

1

HOLY SHIT! on Jun 3, 2019 at 10:37 am
Reply

That video is a dumpster fire! At first I wondered why y’all put up with it. Then it becomes real obvious: She never stops talking. I presume she also controlled the call? Simple solution: Have someone else admin the call, and mute her when she goes on a tirade. Or impeach her ass. You got cause.
2

Robin Sherman on Jun 3, 2019 at 10:48 am
Reply

Several things about SPJ have saddened me the last 9 months. This adds one more thing to my list. Also, I am surprised to learn via this video that SPJ must hire a new executive director. Why is the executive director leaving? When will members learn more about the problems the staff apparently has with the board? As a former board member, committee chair and executive director of a related journalism association, I know first-hand the relationship between staff and board is critical to success, as is the relationship among board members. Obviously.
3

anonymous concern on Jun 3, 2019 at 10:49 am
Reply

I urge you to consult a mental health professional in regards to your president. This behavior is beyond simple egotism. Most concerning are her delusions that only she can save the organization, and that everyone else lacks the understanding she possesses. You owe it to her as well as your organization to remove her from office and urge her to seek immediate counseling. I’m assuming she works as a sole proprietor, because this behavior would have already gotten her fired from any workplace.
4

HCC HawkMedia Club on Jun 3, 2019 at 11:02 am
Reply

Wow! I am amazed by how long it took to make an “unrecognized” motion that is “unrecognized” by the President. I thought I was watching Al Pacino for a whole 60 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7a4xY9ere0
- 5
  
  Jane on Jun 3, 2019 at 2:05 pm
  Reply
  
  The irony that the prez of the Society of Professional Journalists doesn’t allow dissent or discussion depresses me. I don’t think someone who conducts herself like this in a meeting with peers should be leading the society of PROFESSIONAL journalism. This was like a student council meeting.
6

Rossella Lamendola on Jun 3, 2019 at 12:52 pm
Reply

OMG!!!! You are a saint Michael Koretzky for putting up with this insanity!!! But, this organization needs you!!!!!
7

Dollar Bill on Jun 3, 2019 at 2:33 pm
Reply

For someone with a rep as a grenade launcher, you are a surprisingly cool cucumber in this video. A goddam diplomat you are. Really tried to talk this woman off the ledge, didn’t you? Don’t think anything short of an opioid enema would work, though.
8

peegee85 on Jun 3, 2019 at 4:42 pm
Reply

Wow, some serious office politics and ego-tripping going on, I’ve seen similar things in large companies. Honestly, calm and reasoned argument should be a requirement for every participant in a meeting, such a culture should be enforced by everyone attending. Wonder if this step will lead to any meaningful dialogue, hopefully it will at least have a good outcome for SPJ. Good luck!
- 9
  
  Bob Becker on Jun 3, 2019 at 11:05 pm
  Reply
  
  The board is totally dysfunctional Michael. But Alex isn’t the sole cause. At that meeting she had a lot of help from others, including individuals who will be running in September for seats on the board
  
  In fact, if you hadn’t screwed around with the video, your audience might have reached the conclusion I reached after viewing the full discussion. For anyone interested, here’s the link.
  
  Alex presented a perfectly reasonable explanation why Patti should not chair the search committee. You don’t have to agree with her rationale, but give her credit for the validity of her position.
  
  You should consider as well that the SPJ and SDX boards agreed in 2015 about how the search committee should be chosen. That agreement gives the presidents, not either board, the power to choose members, and gives SPJ’s president power to choose the chair.
  
  This is not an SPJ committee covered by the bylaws. The motion demanding that the SPJ board interview finalists is off base for the same reason. The Foundation pays a significant portion of the ED’s salary, and accounts for an equal expenditure of the ED’s time. The choice of the next ED is not solely SPJ’s.
  
  Furthermore, members of the SPJ board attempting to abrogate the 2015 agreement are relying on a misreading of SPJ’s bylaws. The provision allowing the board to appoint committees does not give the board the prerogative to meddle with committee appointments made by the president.
  
  I won’t take a position on impeachment. But impeaching Alex will not end the dysfunction. This board needs an intervention by a very skilled organizational psychologist.
  - 10
    Koretzky on Jun 4, 2019 at 6:29 am
    Reply
    
    Bob, your comment is so SPJ…
    
    Ignore the rantings of the woman in the video to drill down on details about a 2015 “agreement” (which isn’t a law, for crisake) that the board is “attempting to abrogate.”
    
    Watch the video and conclude both sides are wrong: “This board needs an intervention by a very skilled organizational psychologist.” I think most people watching the video believe the board was playing psychologist.
    
    I won’t miss many of you when I’m gone, but I might miss you least of all.
    - 11
      
      Bob Becker on Jun 4, 2019 at 8:43 am
      
      Michael
      
      That agreement amounts to a contract between SPJ and the Foundation. The SPJ board, you included, approved that contract. If it wants to change the terms, it needs to negotiate the changes with the Foundation.
      
      In 2015, the Foundation asked for an amendment to SPJ’s bylaws that would give the Foundation a seat at the table when selecting, evaluating and firing the ED. Robert Leger correctly reasoned that the ED works about 50% for the Foundation, and the Foundation contributes equally to the ED’s salary and benefits. But such an amendment would have violated Illinois corporation law, so we did not propose one. Instead, each board adopted the policy with the expectation the other would honor it, even in difficult times such as these.
      
      I agree that Alex’s lack of leadership and interpersonal skills has been a major problem this year, and particularly in this instance. I would have no complaint if 2/3 of the members of the board vote to oust her.
      
      You did remain calm and reasonable in the meeting. But several of your colleagues did not, as you say, “play[] psychologist.” I am not ignoring Alex’s “rantings”; but you should not ignore Sue’s or Lauren’s “rantings” either. They were off base nearly as much as Alex was, and neither the bylaws nor Robert’s Rules permit what they, Matt and Patti were trying to do.
    - 12
      
      Koretzky on Jun 4, 2019 at 5:36 pm
      
      The board was forced to interrupt to get a word in. You can’t blame any of us for speaking out when one person simply refuses to shut up. The meeting would’ve been a three-hour monologue.
13

sizingupthesouth on Jun 3, 2019 at 7:09 pm
Reply

I think I understand why the past executive director left. Not unlike our US president, power may have gone to Alex’s head. And discounting Patti? Outrageous. I believe she is feeling very out of control and is more concerned about her legacy as the president of SPJ. Is Alex’s non-stop talking revealing a personal crisis or problem? Or is she always like this? I had no idea that membership numbers have dropped so low during her “reign.” SPJ has to change or it will not survive. Something to think about: what kind of damage can still occur to deface SPJ if Alex stays president? Do we need to literally clean house? Egomania is always an issue when an individual puts themselves up on a platform and dictates rather than leads. Can SPJ survive if Alex is dethroned? Can SPJ survive if we don’t impeach her? What kind of damage control will be needed before Alex’s keys to the SPJ kingdom are taken away?
14

A Big Mistake on Jun 3, 2019 at 7:19 pm
Reply

The past executive director left because she made a total mess of SPJ’s finances and didn’t want to face the consequences of having done so.
15

Targa (@astragaal) on Jun 3, 2019 at 8:20 pm
Reply

[Rocking Intensifies]
16

Andrew Seaman on Jun 3, 2019 at 8:20 pm
Reply

I’m not going to comment on the impeachment issue. My involvement with SPJ this year has been minimal, but I spent several years spending an alarming number of hours volunteering as a board member, committee member and committee chairperson in the organization. I care deeply about it, its people and its mission. Even with all of that background, I don’t feel equipped to weigh in on the impeachment issue — and I don’t think nameless internet commenters do either. I can say that the video above does not represent what SPJ is and what SPJ should be. We are an organization that embraces the principles of democracy and elect board members and officers to have open and honest conversations. When they want to discuss an issue, their voices should be heard and their opinions should be considered. Those values are especially important now that SPJ is in such a vulnerable position. The organization has hemorrhaged members and — from what I’ve read — the finances are also depleted. SPJ needs to find a path forward — now. The path starts with finding a new executive director. To do that, the organization should create a hiring committee that excludes anyone who was on the previous committee (including myself) and the executive committee. An outside consultant can lead the new committee through the process of finding two candidates. Those two finalists will be submitted to the boards of SPJ and its foundation for consideration. They and the hiring committee can work together to choose between those finalists. The process removes any baggage or personal feelings that exist from the process. Meanwhile, the board should decide what SPJ is and what it wants to be. For decades, the organization has wanted to be all things to all people. Fortunately, other journalism organizations have popped up over time to lead in certain areas — ONA, Poynter, RTDNA, NPPA and many more. SPJ should find its niche in that landscape and work with those organizations to make a difference for journalists around the country. In my opinion, one of SPJ’s strengths is its status as a 501(c)6 organization that can engage in political activity. In other words, SPJ can be the voice of journalists on Capitol Hill. Additionally, SPJ’s Code of Ethics, which is incredibly near and dear to my heart, is still the industry’s standard. The organization should continue to serve as the voice of ethical journalism and advocate for its use across the profession. As someone outside the ranks of SPJ’s leadership, I know little about what is actually being discussed, but I sincerely hope we’ve started on this path — or a path. Time is of the essence.
- 17
  
  David Cuillier on Jun 4, 2019 at 11:28 am
  Reply
  
  Spot on, Andrew, about an SPJ reboot. So many groups have crowded the lanes in training, FOI, etc. SPJ needs to find its place in the journalism universe, or risk drifting into the abyss. Perhaps it should become THE champion of professional journalism, as you propose. That means pushing the code, calling out lame posers, advocating/lobbying in D.C., and leading national public education campaigns (“Got News?”). Essentially, rebuilding trust and credibility in the institution of the press. That lane is less crowded, and SPJ can own it, if it wants to. But it will require monumental change – a focus on the mission, less so on membership/chapters; a willingness to get into lobbying (a 501c6, so have at it); and a willingness and commitment to give up the traditions most of us were raised on since college. Not easy, but if the organization wants to survive, and improve journalism, it really has little choice. Reboot and rebrand, or die.
  - 18
    
    Andrew Seaman on Jun 4, 2019 at 1:07 pm
    Reply
    
    Thanks, Dave. As I told people while I was ethics chair, it’s not unethical to advocate for a free press, the First Amendment and ethical journalism. If we don’t do it, who will?
19

Anonymous on Jun 3, 2019 at 10:36 pm
Reply

The finances were a mess when the previous executive director of SPJ arrived. The organization was deeply in the red. Don’t try to put that on her. The board leadership is trash.
- 20
  
  fuckyou@fuckyou.com on Jun 3, 2019 at 11:15 pm
  Reply
  
  Prove it, Anonymous. The numbers are in black and white and publicly available. Show us where SPJ was “deep in the red” in 2017.
  - 21
    
    factsvsfiction on Jun 4, 2019 at 2:02 pm
    Reply
    
    YOU prove it, FU. Yes, the numbers are in black and white AND publicly available. The last ED didn’t get to SPJ until early 2018 when the previous administration proposed and the board agreed to a $40,000+ deficit, which mean they went into the fiscal year in red. Get your facts right.
    - 22
      
      Koretzky on Jun 4, 2019 at 2:16 pm
      
      This is a personnel matter, so I can’t comment. But I can say this: SPJ did indeed approve a deficit budget submitted by the previous executive director.
    - 23
      
      David Cuillier on Jun 4, 2019 at 2:52 pm
      
      I like docs:
      Budget explanations in April SPJ Board meeting packets going back eight years (as well as audits and IRS 990 forms lower on the page), available at https://www.spj.org/documentation.asp#packets
      Other documents, such as meeting minutes and archived meeting videos, at https://www.spj.org/documentation.asp#minutes
24

Anonymous on Jun 4, 2019 at 12:10 am
Reply

“The nation’s largest journalism organization has a big problem.”

What’s wrong with IRE? Because this story is all about SPJ, which no longer is the nation’s largest journalism organization. While you were all playing student council, you fell behind.
25

John Brooks on Jun 4, 2019 at 1:25 am
Reply

Tarquinio would drive me off the board with her blatant talking over others and failing to follow bylaws. Impeach her now! SPJ-LA gave me a distinguished journalist award in 2013. In my humble opinion you have a toxic president.
26

Robyn Davis Sekula on Jun 4, 2019 at 2:13 am
Reply

I have never in my life heard someone talks so disrespectfully to fellow volunteers. I have tremendous respect for the other members of this board, and I am mortified that anyone would speak to them in this way.
27

Optimist. Long memory (@Rockmedia) on Jun 7, 2019 at 8:31 pm
Reply

All volunteers need hazard pay. Hazard pay is what people in the military are paid, for fighting In an undeclared, war, until a war is actually declared.

Then fighting it’s just a regular part of the job.
28

Christine Heinrichs on Jun 9, 2019 at 6:15 pm
Reply

Tarquinio has made clear that she is unsuited to SPJ leadership. Board members, and the general membership of SPJ, require inspiration and competence at this difficult time. Thanks to those who have ideas for moving forward. Tarquinio should spare SPJ the disruption of impeachment and resign to clear the air and allow the board to grapple with finding a new executive director.
29

Kathryn Jones on Jun 10, 2019 at 3:21 pm
Reply

Sorry, I was out in Taos, New Mexico, on vacation when I found about all of this and had some connectivity and travel issues, so I’m rather late weighing in on the discussion. I agree that AT was very disrespectful to the board and needs leadership training. A bit late for that now. She should serve as president at the pleasure of the board and not the other way around. A big part of her job is to listen to board members, build consensus, and then lead, which she does not do. Is there any way to minimize any further harm she can do and let her limp to the end of her presidency? I can just see the headlines and hear the Trump soundbites if she’s impeached. If no one will follow her and she has no support, where does her power reside? I hope she will realize the damage she’s done and resign.