NAHJ: The Privilege Of Leading

NAHJ Nation,

   These past few weeks you have been presented with many ideas on how to restore NAHJ by some of the candidates running for a board position. While the road map to getting there is up for debate; what's certain is our best interests for the association we all care for and believe in.

   In my final message to you, I want to discuss the privilege of leading. 

   All candidates have good intentions, but not every person has the experience and qualities necessary to organize, hold accountable and inspire a group to succeed.

    My opponent has some leadership skills. He has proven to be decisive, able to execute plans and is engaged. He has also shown to be divisive with the board and members; disrespectful in communicating and of others; not open to ideas and feedback. I think, possibly with the right training and mentoring he can (one day) be the right person to be president of NAHJ, but not now. We cannot afford training on the job.

   I am an experienced and proven leader.

   I have led many newsrooms in both markets (English, Spanish languages), distinct business cycles (budgets), several platforms and different communities (U.S. and Latin America). I have and continue to coach many professionals, entrepreneurs and students about careers in communication (journalism, production, marketing, sales, specialty content). I started a media company and co-founded a social networking group. I am a lifetime member of NAHJ (organized and led several projects as a member, founder of a local chapter, regional director and VP of broadcast).

   Through it all, I can confidently tell you - without apologies or excuses: any success I've had has been more to do with the talent and skills of the people I led than my own.

   Leadership is not about me, it's about we.

   It's having the confidence of knowing your strengths and ability to understand (and accept) your weaknesses. I take pride in surrounding myself with people who compliment what I bring to the table and who certainly excel at what I need to improve on. 

   Leadership is about being inclusive with your vision. The best ideas are not the ones that come from one person. The best ideas are the ones that are shared with a group and then evolve into something better, even more special than the original (but still faithful to it).

   Leadership is about having the right temperament. You need to have the skill to properly present projects to sponsors and members which sometimes result in receiving constructive/negative feedback....it's not personal.

   Leadership is about image. It's about understanding you represent more than just yourself, but also NAHJ. And that means always being aware that what you say and do is a reflection (of what that person, sponsor, organization) will think of NAHJ and its members. Be protective of that image; nurture it.

   Leadership is not about wanting to be served, but a willingness to serve others. It's about extending your hand and asking, "how can I help you?"

   These are many of the lessons I have leaned in my career and personal life.....and I am happy to say - I'm still learning.

   I'm Hugo Balta and I want to be your next NAHJ president.

   Please take the time to vote today:

   https://eballot4.votenet.com/nahj/login.cfm

Juan Gonzalez Questions For NAHJ Presidential Candidate Hugo Balta

Dear Hugo and Russell:

The tenor of the NAHJ elections has so far been both disheartening and embarrassing to many longtime members. You’ve both expressed a desire to refrain from any further personal attacks, either directly or through your supporters, and that’s a positive step. I applaud the courage of you both for seeking to lead the organization at such a critical time. But there continues to be too much outcry over the process of the elections, over the details of past finances, over how people are being treated personally, and not enough attention on the substance of how to rescue this organization and move it forward.

We all know NAHJ is in dire financial straits. We should all be thankful that the current board steered it through this long and painful year.

But it is imperative that we raise the level of the debate over NAHJ’s future. In any profound crisis, it becomes easier to point fingers, fight among themselves and split up, than to devise cogent, clear plans that unite the most people and move us forward.

Unless I’m missing something, neither of you has yet presented a cohesive plan or vision for NAHJ. Videos about personal histories and your work experience are all well and good. And slogans like Second Half and Yes We Can are catchy. But some of us are old fashioned. We tend to examine first the philosophy, policies and concrete proposals of a candidate rather than his or her commercials. In addition, given that promises are easier to make than to fulfill, we also examine how well the candidates have fulfilled past commitments.

Joe Torres forwarded to you today a list of media policy issues that a few of us veteran NAHJ members would and other members of your respective slates and independents address..

I have another set of questions, however, on how the two of you envision getting the organization off its feet, from where it is today.

1.    On annual conventions:

Hugo seems to favor moving forward with a national convention in 2013, hopefully in Los Angeles in a hotel, as opposed to a convention center. However, it is already extremely late for booking hotel conventions for next year, NAHJ’s track record in Orlando left it owing money (which will affect it’s credit worthiness with any future hotels), the organization has very little cash on-hand, and Los Angeles is an expensive city for hotels. How do you envision overcoming those obstacles, especially when we currently have only an interim director on staff? Remember, with no regular employees you would then have to hire a convention organization to plan and staff the event and that vendor would end up siphoning off a big portion of any convention revenues.

          Russell, if I am not mistaken, seems to favor making next year a regional convention year, and perhaps partnering in 2014 for a national convention with one of the Unity groups or another national Latino group. His plan would eliminate the risk of incurring greater debt immediately, but it would also eliminate the big draw for national sponsors to give money to NAHJ next year. It would leave NAHJ with virtually no money to service its members during 2013-2014, though the surplus from Unity could go to pay largely the salary of an interim executive director, who could then identify new sources of future funding. So Russell, how long do you think NAHJ can survive with no staff and no office, and when do you see reversing the downward spiral of less money and less services?

Hugo:

Thank you very much for this opportunity.

All of these questions require research, counseling and debate.

As far as taking the convention to Los Angeles, I will lean greatly on CCNMA (who have already reached out to the candidates with a willingness to partner in such an enterprise providing staff and local expertise) and of course NAHJ members. It is my understanding that there is a Los Angeles group who hope to present (to the new board) a plan.

I agree that a convention is Los Angeles will be costly, but there are benefits to offset some of the challenges – primarily destination (for members and sponsors). While I think hotels would be a good alternative to a convention hall….universities might also be a more realistic option.

I wouldn’t dismiss alternatives to a convention in Los Angeles (as long as it is fiscally and logistically prudent for NAHJ and its members). And I wouldn’t force an annual convention in 2013, if it did not make financial sense.

To your point…it might be too late to organize an annual convention in 2013. Such decisions have historically been made by the previous board leading up to the convention (and that is not the case this year).

It’s difficult to answer this question definitively prior to the election. If elected to be president – it will be one of the first items I will direct the new board to research, discuss and decide on.

2.    On student projects, mid-career development, and the Hall of Fame. Hugo, do you favor keeping the student projects next year if you are elected, and how would you pay for them? Russell, how would your “regionals every other year” approach address the student projects? And while your regionals approach would depend on local chapters and regional directors to do most of the organizing work, NAHJ’s track record of allowing local groups to keep some of the money they make from those events, or even their portions of dues money, has not been good. How would your regionals approach strengthen the local chapters? Do both of you envision keeping the Hall of Fame Awards and the journalism awards as annual competitions?

Hugo:

I do not support any program that does not have the funding required to plan and produce it.

I think what was needed in the past two years (as a compliment to or instead of the financial committee) was a fundraising committee. NAHJ, like all not-for-profits relies on fundraising to provide the services to its members. The loss of the staff has crippled NAHJ’s ability to do so.

In speaking with some sponsors there is an interest in supporting the student projects and mid-career training because those programs are in line with their own initiatives (and budget).

The question/challenge is what type of interest (if any) would there be for those programs outside of a national convention.

3.    On the issue of defining regular members. The issue of restricting NAHJ membership to working journalists has been a recurring one since the organization was founded. Clearly the industry has undergone dramatic transformation in the past few years. Many of our members have seen it necessary to go into public relations, while many do now do reporting on blogs and websites, yet earn the bulk of their income from other types of work. But given the enormous power of the public relations industry (the big companies not the small mom-and-pop variety), there is a real danger of NAHJ’s regular membership being inundated by former Latino journalists now working for major companies (just one example, and she is a very good friend of mine, is Mari Santana of Disney, who used to work for Channel 47). Please specify the position both of you on any bylaws changes to the definition of Regular and Associate Members?

Hugo:

It is my opinion that NAHJ needs to accept professionals in the communications industry as regular members and that there needs to be a seat on the Board in order to have their voices heard.

It is clear to me that the new Board will need to look at many of its bylaws and discuss changes that will better reflect the new reality of our industry (and members), make decisions to restore the association without undermining its present and future.

We can look to the other affinity groups who have tackled this same issue (as a guide on what’s best for NAHJ).

I understand and defend the “J” in NAHJ, but I would be foolish (as president) not to discuss changes with the Board and members.

4.    On changing the structure of the NAHJ board. Some veteran NAHJ members, like ex-president Diane Alverio, have favored bringing non-journalists from the corporate or financial world on to the NAHJ board to assist in some areas were our boards have historically been weak – financial oversight, fundraising. Would you favor such an approach? Why or why not? What do you see as the pitfalls or limitations of this?

Hugo:

I agree in exploring bringing non-journalists from the corporate/financial world on to the NAHJ board. We can only benefit from their expertise (that is their 9-5 job).

I do not dismiss any of the hard work by previous boards (and their financial officers); some who have some experience in (or talent for) finances.

But, I say – bring on the experts. It will still be up to the board to make the final decision. The only limitations or pitfalls is in handing over complete control. If the board appoints them, provides a reasonable timetable (with scheduled meetings) to discuss, approve, plan and execute – NAHJ would have much to gain.

5.    On “break-through” fundraising. Over the course of NAHJ’s life, there were three “break-through” ideas that drew major support from philanthropic foundations and media companies and helped the organization grow dramatically. First, was the original idea in the early 1980s to create a national Hispanic journalists group, made possible by several grants of $100,000 from the Gannett foundation that made the birth of NAHJ possible. Then came in the late 1980s, the idea of creating UNITY, which was made possible by huge grants from the Ford Foundation to help all the organizations grow and create our historic alliance. Then in 2003-2004 came the Parity Project, which ended up raising about $1.4 million from the McCormick Tribune Foundaton in several grants, as well as another  $125,000 from the Knight Foundation. It’s my experience that foundations and companies don’t donate money to help you out of a financial bind – they invest in powerful ideas that can bring about change in a society, community or industry. What “break-through” idea have you been mulling over for NAHJ, one for which you would take the lead in developing a business plan for and convincing a major foundation to invest in?

Hugo:

I think media companies are struggling to find candidates who will help them achieve their business goal to effectively target the booming Latino community.

We know that there is no “one way” to reach out to the 50 million + Latinos in the U.S.

The Census likes to put us all into one bucket because it’s simple, but the reality is that we are very diverse (language fluency, race, country of origin (personal or family), etc.)

    

 There are few Latinos who have the experience (and training) to navigate through both distinct markets (English and Spanish language), understanding of the differences between Latinos in the west coast Vs. the east coast and the sensibilities of a household where often there are preferences in the consumption of news, information and entertainment (English, Spanish, both languages).

     NAHJ can be the resource in helping these companies find these specialized candidates.

     It’s not just about training members at regional conferences and conventions or providing their resumes on the NAHJ website. I’d like to explore the possibility of using a format borrowed from the Parity Project in providing grants to place journalists (at all levels) in newsrooms. The program would be finite (3-6 quarters), specific (project driven), measured (scheduled feedback sessions) and hopefully result in permanent jobs. A rotation perhaps from one market (and platform) to the next during their tenure…field training and experience.

     I’ve had the benefit of working in both markets (English and Spanish) and can attest to the wasted resources (financial and time) by media companies who are looking for a silver bullet (and hiring fly by night experts) when they can be investing in a program that develops journalists, makes them more marketable and assists (the companies) for the long term.

Don’t feel you have to give provide detailed position papers on these questions. A paragraph or two would suffice. Please give us something of substance that we can judge your candidacies on. And good luck to both of you.

Sincerely,

Juan Gonzalez

     

Advocacy Journalism

In the last couple of days many members have asked poignant questions of the candidates running for the NAHJ Board.

I think these questions (and the practice) are very important in assisting members in making informed decisions as they vote.

I wanted to share with you my answers in response to NAHJ and its role in advocacy journalism.

The National Association of Hispanic Journalists has a proud history of speaking out for, on behalf of and support in the fair treatment of Latino journalists in this country (and abroad). NAHJ advocates for the proper representation of Latinos employed in the media, the training and education of its members and engages in debate that promotes the fair and accurate coverage of the Latino community.

As President, one of my main responsibilities will be to lead the Board in ensuring the association is faithful to that mission.

                

My vision is not only for NAHJ to fight for a just media system, but to lead the discussion towards that end. It is my experience as a manager that too often NAHJ reacts when it should be acting. It isn’t enough for the association to wave its finger at media companies and say “shame on you”. It must nurture relationships with them in order to assist in reaching goals and avoiding questionable practices specific to Latinos.

NAHJ needs to reintroduce itself to media companies who (too often) see it as a Latino journalism watchdog group. The media companies need to see NAHJ as an organization that is willing to help them in meeting their goals (Latino initiatives), present them with ideas to improve the quality of their content (rules and standards) and provide them with candidates (potential employees, experts (as guests)).

NAHJ cannot lead the improvement of the coverage of Latinos or increase the presence and influence of them in newsrooms without establishing relationships with media companies. It is only through those “enlaces” that NAHJ can help develop strategies that can be measured and held accountable for. Right now, sponsorships are the only topics dominating the communication with media companies.

And of course, NAHJ needs to be prepared to engage media companies when their coverage of Latinos and treatment of employees (Latinos) is questionable. It’s not only about denouncing the action (if it warrants), but also using it as a learning tool to help the media company avoid such an action in the future.

I would also like to add that I believe that as an association (and as a journalist) we cannot afford to stay in the sidelines in covering issues that affect the community we serve (and are a part of).

We shouldn't hide under the blanket of objectivity when it comes to reporting on education, human rights, immigration, employment and the countless other social ailments that affect all Latinos (not just foreign born).

It is only by understanding that who we are (ethnicity, gender, age, where we live, etc.) effects our decision making and how we cover stories that we truly achieve fair and accuracy in our reporting (and not just being objective).

We need to partner with groups that will help our members understand the plight of our community and how to best tell their stories, fight for their rights.

Let us not forget that we, as journalists give voice to the voiceless, hold the powerful accountable and empower our community to take action.

Cuestionables Practicas de las Elecciones de la NAHJ

Miembros,


Quiero compartir con ustedes una carta que mande a Elaine Aradillas (Jefa del Comité de Elecciones) y con Anna Lopez (Directora Ejecutiva provisional). 


Despues de recibir varios correos electronicos de miembros con inquietudes sobre el proceso (de las elecciones)...me sentí en la obligación de involucrarme directamente.


Aqui les presento parte del  mensaje que mande el Sabado (21/7): (porque parte? porque el ejemplo que les brinde es sobre uno de nuestros miembros y no me siento comodo compartiendo su identidad) 


Anna, Elaine,


Muchos miembros de NAHJ me han comunicado su preocupación por lo que clasifican como cuestionables prácticas de la organización, al no proveer una comunicación clara en el proceso de votación y determinación de quienes no son elegibles para votar en la elección de éste año.

-Muchos dicen que no han recibido un correo electrónico de NAHJ invitándolos a votar.

-Muchos se quejan porque no pueden encontrar donde votar en el sitio web de NAHJ

-Muchos son miembros con su membresía al día y me dicen que no pueden votar. 

-Otros no tienen claro porque no pueden votar y exigen saber porque el Comité de Elecciones de NAHJ determinaron su falta de derecho para votar.

Estos casos estan ensombreciendo las elecciones de NAHJ. 

Ya se han presentado quejas bien documentadas de favoritismo hacia algunos candidatos y me preocupa que pronto surgirán acusaciones de fraude electoral.

Aprecio el volumen y la responsabilidad de su trabajo (de trabajar en las elecciones y con los miembros).

Les solicité que por favor manejen estas situaciones con urgencia, claridad, paciencia y respeto.

Los miembros están a punto de explotar.

Hugo


---


Por su parte Anna Lopez me contesto el mismo dia...y estoy muy agradecido (especialmente porque era en un dia de fin de semana).


Anna me dice que todo los miembros elegibles para votar han debido de recibir una carta (electronica) personal de NAHJ el 16 de Julio. Ella dice que miembros (elegible para votar) que se han comunicado con ella (o Elaine) han recibido una llamada (o comunicacion) de la oficina de NAHJ explicando la situacion.


Con respecto a los miembros que piensan que tienen el derecho de votar, Anna les pide que se comuniquen con ella o Elaine:
Anna: alopez@nahj.org
Elaine: elaine_aradillas@yahoo.com

Tambien me dijo que ella y los empleados de NAHJ estan muy ocupados con la convencion y que estan tratando lo mejor posible de asistir con las preguntas de los miembros (sobre las elecciones).


Bueno amigos...les pido que no esperen hasta el ultimo momento para votar (para tener suficiente tiempo en resolver problemas, si se presentan).


Como siempre....a sus ordenes, Hugo

Hugo Balta's Observations on NAHJ's Town Hall Meeting

Dear NAHJ Nation,

My name is Hugo Balta and as many of you know, I am running for NAHJ President. 

Like several members, I joined Tuesday's town hall meeting to better understand and discuss NAHJ's financial report with the Board leadership (President Michelle Salcedo, Finance Officer Russell Contreras), interim Executive Director Anna Lopez and accountant Andrew Powell.

Here is what I learned:

Without a doubt, confirmed by Mr. Powell - NAHJ would not be in the black....not even close to a surplus if not for laying off the staff and shutting down the office.

Cutting to profitability is a  double edge sword. It's a ticket you can only punch once.

So, the staff was laid off in 2011 to get in the black -- what are current NAHJ leaders planning to do for an encore in 2012 (and beyond afterall, there is no staff left to cut)? 

   The only answer my opponent could come up with to that question was "stay the   course". That is not a clear and strategic plan.

The staff was key in fundraising and the Financial Officer had no definitive answer as to how he or the Finance Committee who came up with the austerity budget plans (ed) to grow NAHJ's finances.

Fundraising is the lifeline of any not-for-profit. That is a 52 week a year job that the staff oversees and the Board is responsible for.

The national convention has historically been NAHJ's best fundraising event.

It is irresponsible to learn weeks before the convention that there isn't a confirmed location (let alone decision) for the national convention in 2013. The process should have been completed weeks ago (in order to give the new Board and staff a solid plan to execute).

The answers we received are unacceptable.

Of course, NAHJ needs to make fiscally prudent decisions in organizing a national convention, but that does not give the leaders a license not to organize one. And for the leaders (the Financial Officer included) not to know that the last convention (Orlando) was profitable is absurd.

I believe in producing engaging, solid regional conferences that mirror the national convention (as a compliment), but not as a substitute. The interim Executive Director herself said the increase in regional conferences was a pilot program that generated few attendees and even fewer dollars when compared to the national convention.  

I agree wholeheartedly with President Salcedo's assessment that recruiters are not going to the annual convention because they're not finding the candidates (mid level career) that they are looking for. Hell, I'm testament to that (ESPN hired a third party recruiting company to find me: a qualified candidate for management with a sensibility for the Latino community in English and Spanish language markets).

The answer is not  - don't organize a national convention. The answer is treat your sponsors and members like the clients they are and improve NAHJ's services. Ask what their needs are and supply that demand.

I wrote about my concern of my opponent's plans to end with annual conventions last week; I invite you to read more  about it by clicking on this link: http://hugo4nahj.blogspot.com/2012/07/end-of-annual-conventions-for-nahj.html

Sal Morales asked (of the candidates for President) if we would consider partnering with other associations in producing annual conventions (as a way to manage cost), but was not given the chance to hear our response.....well, here it is: Yes.

I've already explored that opportunity with associations that represent Latinos in journalism and communications as well as other journalism organizations. All not-for-profits have been challenged by the changes in the industry and economy....we can all grow by pulling together - and not lose our identity in the process. I underline communications because it is time to embrace change. NAHJ needs to evolve, we need to welcome back members who are in the communications field.

Lastly, a member asked if the current leadership knew how much money NAHJ had in the bank. The answer again was not clear. That's a number that should roll out of the Financial Officer's mouth before the member finished her question.

NAHJ Nation, do we need a second half like the first half? 

Board member after Board member resigning, relationships with other affinity groups strained, mistreatment of members and sponsors, short cut solutions to long term problems and a storm of negative controversy.

We can do better.

Vote today.

Together we can bring NAHJ back!

Let's bring back the stability, reputation and pride.

I am Hugo Balta and I want to be your next NAHJ President.

Yes, we can!

Si, se puede!

The end of annual conventions for NAHJ?

Where's NAHJ hosting the 2013 Convention? Like so many other questions...this one too goes unanswered by the current NAHJ leadership. There's a push (although we would have a difficult time getting Russell Contreras to confirm it) to move from an annual convention to local conferences. That is an alternative touted for it's cost savings that like the decision to lay off NAHJ's  staff, shutdown the office and diminish the website is riddled with flaws. Here's why: -sponsors are as economically challenged as NAHJ. Most do not have the budget to attend two or three separate conferences (and you have to consider they're also budgeting going to other conventions (NABJ, AAJA, etc). -the draw for sponsors is the access they get to potential candidates. It's one stop shopping for them (members attending the convention from all U.S. markets). -the convention is the largest fundraising event that NAHJ produces. -Local conferences do not draw the number of members (as the convention). -Members go to the convention (in part) to network with colleagues and companies from across the country. If we eliminated the convention and only produced local conferences than they would only network with local media professionals (and companies). We don't need to eliminate the annual convention...we need to a better job of producing it. Here's what many members have shared with me: -limit the locations. There should be a finite list of cities (driven by easy travel access, tourism and media significance). -move from a convention center to a hotel (economy, easier to fill). -consider partnering with a university (location for panels, training, social events, etc.) I think NAHJ needs to host the 2013 convention in Los Angeles. -most of the 50M+ Latinos call L.A. County home. -it's the #1 market for Spanish language media, #2 for the general market. -NAHJ's local chapter can lead in producing the convention...they're our local experts. -we can ask to meet with other media organizations (CCNMA among them) to partner with us in hosting. -there's already a campaign underway to explore the economic impact (in producing and fundraising). Let's not limit our ideas by short sighted, band-aid solutions that only address the here and now at the larger expense of tomorrow. We're already experiencing the impact of those decisions to member and sponsor services. Thats not the type of "rescue" we need from a RUSS-olucion. We can do better. Yes, we can! Si, Se Puede!! Hugo Balta for NAHJ President 2012 Ask Questions, Get Answers at Hugo4NAHJ@gmail.com