14
edits
Ructions: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Extra bit to leadership style
(Reworded intro) |
(Extra bit to leadership style) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In the summer of 2004, YSTV went through much upheaval when the newly elected Station Director was subjected to a vote of no-confidence just weeks after his election. The series of events became known by some as 'Ructions' after an initial email regarding the dispute which triggered the problems was sent with the title "Prepare for ructions". The story goes something like this... | In the summer of 2004, YSTV went through much upheaval when the newly elected Station Director was subjected to a vote of no-confidence just weeks after his election. The series of events became known by some as 'Ructions' after an initial email regarding the dispute which triggered the problems was sent with the title "Prepare for ructions". The story goes something like this... | ||
Note: The initial | Note: The initial text of this article was written by two active members of YSTV during this period, however the subject matter is highly charged. The article has been reviewed by as many as possible of the people who were members at the time, and every effort has been made to ensure that this article is a statement of facts and nothing more, however others who were there at the time are invited to correct or contradict where they feel appropriate. The intention is certainly not to discredit James Flinders or to criticise him as a person, merely to describe the events of the time as they affected YSTV, including some of the underlying problems. | ||
==Background== | ==Background== | ||
Leading up to the YSTV committee elections in 2004 three friends, all fairly new to YSTV, were considering standing for important roles. They were [[Jen Ayerst]], [[James Flinders]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]]. Rowan briefly thought about standing for Production Director, Studio Manager or Station Director. As Jen stood for [[Production Director]], Rowan went for [[Studio Manager]] and James for [[Station Director]]. Jen's production interests made this the logical position for her, and while Rowan considered the leader role, he decided against on the basis that (a) James wanted to run and wasn't so keen on Studio Manager, and (b) he could run for it in his third year if he desired. | Leading up to the YSTV committee elections in 2004 three friends, all fairly new to YSTV, were considering standing for important roles. They were [[Jen Ayerst]], [[James Flinders]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]]. Rowan briefly thought about standing for Production Director, Studio Manager or Station Director. As Jen stood for [[Production Director]], Rowan went for [[Studio Manager]] and James for [[Station Director]]. Jen's production interests made this the logical position for her, and while Rowan considered the leader role, he decided against on the basis that (a) James wanted to run and wasn't so keen on Studio Manager, and (b) he could run for it in his third year if he desired. All three were successfully elected to these posts. James unfortunately was in Canada for {{unsure|some time}} following the AGM, and so Rowan, as new Studio Manager, was left as acting [[Station Director]]. Not a lot of note happened during this time in YSTV itself. Generally YSTV was doing well, having increased its membership considerably thanks to the efforts of the [[Gang of Four]], having had its most successful [[NaSTA]] ever and having made the place look better due to the recent [[YSTV Clean-Up]], which has also brought people together. | ||
All three were successfully elected to these posts. James unfortunately was in Canada for {{unsure|some time}} following the AGM, and so Rowan, as new Studio Manager, was left as acting [[Station Director]]. Not a lot of note happened during this time in YSTV itself. Generally YSTV was doing well, having increased its membership considerably thanks to the efforts of the [[Gang of Four]], having had its most successful [[NaSTA]] ever and having made the place look better due to the recent [[YSTV Clean-Up]], which has also brought people together. | |||
==Problems In YSTV== | ==Problems In YSTV== | ||
===URY In Bars=== | ===URY In Bars=== | ||
The first problems came due to the debate over the playout of [[URY]] in campus bars, long an ambition of the radio station. Whilst out of the country, James had been in contact with Tim Bateson and [[Matt Fullerton]] of URY (who was not an active member of YSTV at this point) about proposed plans for URY to be broadcast in campus bars using [[Rediffusion]]. James had responded on behalf of YSTV stating that "it would be unfair for URY to be allowed to broadcast in campus bars", not unreasonably suggesting that it would cut off YSTV's main distribution medium. | The first problems came due to the debate over the playout of [[URY]] in campus bars, long an ambition of the radio station. Whilst out of the country, James had been in contact with Tim Bateson and [[Matt Fullerton]] of URY (who was not an active member of YSTV at this point) about proposed plans for URY to be broadcast in campus bars using [[Rediffusion]]. James had responded on behalf of YSTV stating that "it would be unfair for URY to be allowed to broadcast in campus bars", not unreasonably suggesting that it would cut off YSTV's main distribution medium.[[Richard Ash]] contacted a number of active members forwarding on the previous correspondence. Richard also sent a message to URY pointing out that the initial response had been without internal consultation, something that any major decision such as this would require. Whilst few would doubt James had good intentions, his methods were seen as somewhat undemocratic and not in the spirit a democratic society. Richard later apologised if he had overstepped the mark in regards to his authority as a new [[Technical Director]], although few thought this was the case. | ||
[[Richard Ash]] contacted a number of active members forwarding on the previous correspondence. Richard also sent a message to URY pointing out that the initial response had been without internal consultation, something that any major decision such as this would require. Whilst few would doubt James had good intentions, his methods were seen as somewhat undemocratic and not in the spirit a democratic society. Richard later apologised if he had overstepped the mark in regards to his authority as a new [[Technical Director]], although few thought this was the case. | |||
===YSTV Corporate Style=== | ===YSTV Corporate Style=== | ||
| Line 20: | Line 14: | ||
===The Constitution=== | ===The Constitution=== | ||
James responded to the criticism about his handling of the URY in bars issue with another email to the "people" list, using the constitution to defend his actions. It was his opinion that the document did not include any guidance as to how the society should make decisions, or forbid him from doing so alone should he see fit. At the time (and probably the case through most of YSTV's history) the constitution existed as a set of guidelines and some protection against negligence on the part of the officership. To use it as a means-to-an-end or as justification for one's actions was not a common action, and the use of the constitution in this manner was not well received. When this was brought up he mentioned an example of a decision he made to relinquish the shared office in Vanbrugh college, which he took after consulation with senior officers but made the eventual decision himself. He said he saw decisions like this as part of his remit and that he would continue to make decisions like this in the society's interest. This was seen as not only confrontational but unncessarily defensive given that such "disputes" in recent history of YSTV would normally be | James responded to the criticism about his handling of the URY in bars issue with another email to the "people" list, using the constitution to defend his actions. It was his opinion that the document did not include any guidance as to how the society should make decisions, or forbid him from doing so alone should he see fit. At the time (and probably the case through most of YSTV's history) the constitution existed as a set of guidelines and some protection against negligence on the part of the officership. To use it as a means-to-an-end or as justification for one's actions was not a common action, and the use of the constitution in this manner was not well received. When this was brought up he mentioned an example of a decision he made to relinquish the shared office in Vanbrugh college, which he took after consulation with senior officers but made the eventual decision himself. He said he saw decisions like this as part of his remit and that he would continue to make decisions like this in the society's interest. This was seen as not only confrontational but unncessarily defensive given that such "disputes" in recent history of YSTV would normally be settled over a pint in Goodricke bar, not by using the constitution as a defence. | ||
It was at this point real concerns began to emerge about the choice the society had made for [[Station Director]], given that the issues highlighted were unlikely to go away. [[Richard Ash]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]] both voiced their concerns to James via email, with Rowan in particular concerned about how defensive he was becoming and the lack of consultation from him over major issues. In response James repeatedly stated it was his job to uphold the constitution - something that had rarely troubled previous [[Station Directors]] who had been more concerned with making telly and attracting new members. Richard subsequently proposed an ammendment to the constitution to clarify matters as a result of the earlier uncertainty over the [[Station Director]] role. His intention appeared to be simply to avoid problems in the future however it may have been seen as a direct response to the arguments taking place at the time. This was proposed and failed because of questions over the wording of the amendment. It was agreed to correct these and return to the matter as most agreed some clarification was needed in the constitution on this matter, but other events overtook it, and the matter never needed to be re-visited. | It was at this point real concerns began to emerge about the choice the society had made for [[Station Director]], given that the issues highlighted were unlikely to go away. [[Richard Ash]] and [[Rowan de Pomerai]] both voiced their concerns to James via email, with Rowan in particular concerned about how defensive he was becoming and the lack of consultation from him over major issues. In response James repeatedly stated it was his job to uphold the constitution - something that had rarely troubled previous [[Station Directors]] who had been more concerned with making telly and attracting new members. Richard subsequently proposed an ammendment to the constitution to clarify matters as a result of the earlier uncertainty over the [[Station Director]] role. His intention appeared to be simply to avoid problems in the future however it may have been seen as a direct response to the arguments taking place at the time. This was proposed and failed because of questions over the wording of the amendment. It was agreed to correct these and return to the matter as most agreed some clarification was needed in the constitution on this matter, but other events overtook it, and the matter never needed to be re-visited. | ||
===Leadership Style=== | ===Leadership Style=== | ||
In reponse to some of the criticism he was receiving James stated that he felt that his position involved more than just "sending e-mails and chairing meetings", however some other officers felt that essentially the [[Station Director]] job is indeed centred mainly around communication and people management rather than making the big decisions. This sentiment later became a running joke in later years, with 2006/07 [[Station Director]] [[Matthew Tole]] saying "I have none of the power, but all of the responsbility". This disagreement was perhaps the crux of the issues which eventually led to the no confidence vote, which is a shame as such disagreements appear to have been few and far between in recent YSTV history, with most debates focussing on how to improve the reach, image or output of the station rather than how it is run. | In reponse to some of the criticism he was receiving James stated that he felt that his position involved more than just "sending e-mails and chairing meetings", however some other officers felt that essentially the [[Station Director]] job is indeed centred mainly around communication and people management rather than making the big decisions. This sentiment later became a running joke in later years, with 2006/07 [[Station Director]] [[Matthew Tole]] saying "I have none of the power, but all of the responsbility". This disagreement was perhaps the crux of the issues which eventually led to the no confidence vote, which is a shame as such disagreements appear to have been few and far between in recent YSTV history, with most debates focussing on how to improve the reach, image or output of the station rather than how it is run. | ||
There were also concerns over how the station was being "run" after James' election. As alluded to above far more emphasis was being placed on the mechanics and politics of the constituion than previously, the station meetings became argumentative and tense (and lengthy, as described below) and the general feeling was that the place was becoming much more politicised than previously. This may not have been necessarily due to the approach James took, but certainly seemed more than a coincidence. It was also suspected that he viewed the role more as if chairing one of the campus political groups than that of a student media society, and this was seen in his great prescence and emphasis on meetings and email but not that often in the station itself getting involved in productions. | |||
===Meeting Length=== | ===Meeting Length=== | ||