ANU Student Media Constitutional Review – notes on proposed changes
In July of this year Woroni established a Constitutional Review Committee to review the ANU Student Media Constitution. The Review Committee looked at three questions (see each table below) and received suggestions/queries from members of the Association.
You will see the list of suggestions/queries under each of the three questions and next to them is a response from the Review Committee.
In the final column you will see the agreed decision/action by the Board of Editors – a number of which need to be passed at the General Meeting on 1 November.
Attached to this document updated version of the Woroni Constitution (with track changes) that will be tabled at the special general meeting on 1 November (at 12.30pm in Union Court) with a motion “That the members of the Association (ANU Student Media) approve the new Constitution”.
1. Is there anything in the Constitution that clearly does not work in terms of the way Woroni operates on a day-to-day basis? (e.g. are there any difficulties/ sticky points etc)
Suggestion/query / View of the Committee / Comments from Committee / Action to be taken (agreed by Board)1.1. The three week requirement for passing constitutional changes seems a bit excessive / Keep 3 week requirement / This is quite standard and necessary to ensure any changes to the constitution are well publicised and debated. / None required
1.2. Approval for publishing – 6 editors is too much to, say, get something on the website or post something on FB or Twitter / Agree it needs to change / This can be done by amending Section 11 to make the restriction of having 6 editors apply only to the publication of the newspaper.
And also in adding a new section that gives the Board power to establish its own process for approving, say, web articles or radio podcasts. / Add “of Woroni” in this section so it will read “the Board may only authorise publication of Woroni where at least 6 Members of the Board vote in favour”
Add a new sub-section which states: The Board of Editors must set up a process for approving the publication of any ‘other media’
1.3. We don’t have a Public Officer – do we really need one? / This is a legislative requirement in the ACT / Perhaps have a cross-reference to the relevant ACT legislation so people know what the Public Officer does / Have this referenced on the Woroni website.
2. Do you want to see any specific changes to the Woroni Constitution?
Suggestion/query / View of the Committee / Comments from Committee / Action to be taken (agreed by Board)2.1. Change from having eight editors to ten / Keep it at eight / This is a matter for the Board. / Board still to determine a position on this.
2.2. Get rid of the requirement about the masthead / Agree / Does not make sense why this would be so prescriptive. Suggest changing the wording to simply make clear that only the word “Woroni” is constitutionally protected. / Amend Sec 9 to read “The Association must publish a hard copy of and online publication with the masthead Woroni”
2.3. Change the number of approvals needed for something to be published online / Agree (see 1.2.) / See 1.2. / See 1.2.
2.4. Ditch the requirement in Section 7.6.7 for nominees for editor to have “previously made at least three contributions over a period of two weeks and one day” / Agree / It is not very clear why there is a requirement to have this period of “two weeks and one day”. / The Board has not agreed to change this requirement as it feels it is necessary to ensure potential editors have proven a commitment to/understanding of Woroni. To make it clearer it is proposed that the wording in 7.6.7 be amended to now say “must have made at least three contributions over a period greater than two weeks".
2.5. Scrap the bit in the Constitution that sets out an order for election for Office bearers (it currently says Managing Editor, then Deputy Editor-in-Chief, then Editor-in-Chief) and that it must be by secret ballot etc / Agree / Not necessary to elect in that order. Not sure why it was there.
The requirement is overly prescriptive and unnecessary if, for example as has happened with the current Board, there is agreement as to who will fill each position / Delete Sec 7.7.3.
2.6. Ensure that there is provision to have the updated version of the Press Council Principles / Agree / The Press Council will be putting out new principles later in the year and we need to ensure these can automatically replace the current ones in our Constitution / Amend Sec 10(a). to say “the publication complies in its entirety with the Principles, as issued from time to time by The Australian Press Council, and outlined in Schedule 1 of this Constitution…”
3. Do you have any other specific ideas or dreams for the future Woroni Constitution?
Suggestion/query / View of the Committee / Comments from the Committee / Action to be taken (agreed by Board)3.1. Ten editors / See 2.1. / See 2.1. / See2.1.
3.2. Weekly newspaper / The Constitution already allows for this / This is a decision for the Board of Editors. / None required
3.3. That the constitution is shorter / Not really possible with current requirements / This is always a lovely dream though J / None required