Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

[thebluehatman]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.../NEWS/60912031

The editor of the student newspaper at South Dakota State University will go to court tomorrow to seek a restraining order that would allow reporters to cover interviews of finalists in the search for SDSU’s next president.

The state regents have said they intend to ban reporters from the interviews.

But Jeremy Fugleberg, the paper’s editor in chief, intends to ask a judge for an order that would prevent them from doing so.

The interviews are scheduled for Thursday and Friday in Brookings.

The Collegian is being represented by Sioux Falls attorney Jon Arneson, who also represents the Argus Leader.

[JackJD]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

I probably side with journalists 95% of the time on "public input" and "open meetings" issues.  (My undergrad degree:  BS Journalism from SDSU).  However, on this issue -- hiring a university president -- I think the Argus Leader is all wet.

Hiring a university president requires some hard, frank discussions.  A candidate will have to ask some difficult questions about what the university has done wrong in the past or what some of the expectations are for the future.  The university surely must press the candidate to determine what strengths the candidate may bring to the position -- and what weaknesses they'll drag with them too.  Can you imagine a candidate asking the regents hard questions about whether the regents will interfere with the new president's administration?  What if that candidate did his homework and knows, for example, that some in the legislature attempted to block the D-1 move by legislative action...shouldn't that candidate ask about how often and to what degree the legislature interferes with athletic policy?  Those are fair questions that I would ask if I was a candidate.  Why would a top person at an excellent university give up that position for one at SDSU without asking hard, even embarassing questions?

I have been involved in screening candidates and hiring top level personnel for quasi-public entities.  How can I ask a candidate about a DUI six years ago, or quiz them about what may appear to be a weakness in handling their personal finances if the responses will appear in tomorrow's newspaper?  (I've had to ask both questions.)  You can bet complete background searches were conducted on all candidates and those searches reveal criminal history, financial/credit history, job history and reasons for separation from prior positions etc.  

So, we want Randall Beck sitting there?  (I have never openly criticized the Argus editor so here's the first time:  I have often privately thought the guy is, well, a little goofy at times and simply wrongheaded at other times.  Now, I know the editors like to poke and prod so that we all become critical thinkers.  All well and good but I don't want them to screw up candidate interviews with the implied threat that everything said will be published.)

What if the best candidate says something like this to Regent Jewett:  I'll take this job if I have the full support of the Regents in raising academic salaries 10% each year for the next two years and then a minimum of cost-of-living increases each year after that.  Will you give me that support?  Will you go to bat for me with the Legislature?  What if Jewett wants to say "yes"!  He'd never give an answer if a reporter or a member of the public coming off the street was sitting there because the question wouldn't be asked in the first place.

What if that candidate said something like this:  I'll only take this job if you give me free reign to separate SDSU from USD and the other institutions in terms of salaries, work hours etc.  Within reason, I want more independence from the other schools.  SDSU is unique.  It is a land-grant institution with special obligations to the state.  I think this school can be a great research institution and I want the professors to teach 25% less and to use that time for world-class research.  That means we'll have to hire 60 new doctoral-level professors.  Will you give me that support?

Personally, I'd love to hear that kind of talk.  But, how would that sell in the newspaper?  Or, worse yet, how would that sell on the local radio station on which anonymous callers can say anything they want without fear of being discovered?

I cannot imagine any significant hiring decision (not an election) that is open to the public.  

I am not opposed to the public and press having a chance to quiz -- like at a press conference -- the top candidates for a position but I'm not hot on that idea.  But, we're not set up for such a situation this time.  We have a system in place that serves us well.

I agree with those posters who were critical of the spin--or lack thereof--that Tad Perry put on or failed to put on his comments.  Then again, were his words cherry-picked (taken out of context)?  

[jackrabbit1979]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

Looks like Judge Steele ruled in favor of the Collegian...

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.../NEWS/60913014

[filbert]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

I sure hope we don't lose a great President due to this.

The Regents need to fire whatever lawyer (if any) they had on the conference call (!!!!!!!) arguing their case.

[thebluehatman]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

maybe it would be fair for the regents to request to be involved when the collegian decides a new editor :. i know i would like to be in the discussions when they get a new editor at the end of the school year.

[jackrabbit1979]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

Not referring specifically to this subject, but Mr. Fuegleberg (sp?) and the rest of the Collegian Staff have done a great job at the collegian this year so far. The paper looks light years ahead of where it has in years past. Their work on the Mid Con stuff was great and the overall layout and appearance of the paper is ten times better than what it has been in the past.

[JackTwice]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

My guess is all this will do is make the preceedings that much more private. Essentially all the Collegian has done is taken away the student voice. My guess is that the candidates will meet with no one but the regents.

[SoDak]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

So, the Argus will get it's access, and they don't have to look like the heavy. How nice. I'd have rather had them use their money for the legal fees. The way I understand this thing, it's because other groups get to be present. The BOR should just exclude everyone then.

[NightHawk78]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

The Collegian probably doesn't have the money for legal fees; some years, the paper has had to beg for help in order to stay afloat. I'm guessing that someone else paid the legal fees (such as the state newspaper group or a foundation) or that the lawyer was doing some pro bono work.

It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at the emergency BoR exec session tonight.

FYI: Fugleberg interned for the Argus Leader this summer.

[jackrabit1]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

What's next? The Argus wants a reporter present to report on the next interview for a janitor?

[thebluehatman]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

The response to the Argus in the letters today is quite nice to say it bluntly.

What I do not appreciate in any manner is the ever increasing role that your editorial staff appears to play in delivering your opinion on various issues to the public.

Your general disdain for our governor, your disapproval of abortion vehicles parking in legal parking spots, your nitpicking about things like the Board of Regents reserving the right to pick a qualified candidate for a job without asking you - in essence, your seeming lack of respect for your role as an unbiased media vehicle, and your abuse of the power that you do possess, is disturbing to me
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...609140328/1053

The regents have publicly announced four finalists for the position and have posted their resumes on the Internet for all to see. They are only seeking advice from faculty, students, staff, administration, alumni, donors and Brookings community members, and yet you call the regents arrogant for seeing "no value to public involvement."
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...609140327/1053

The regents have a responsibility to hire the best possible candidate available. They may need to ask some questions that may or may not be in the best interests of the general public, and might be embarrassing to the candidate.

Did the general public have any input when the CEO of the Argus Leader was selected? I don't think so. That was management's job.
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...609140326/1053

I think the arrogance in this matter is coming from the Argus Leader. They don't need you looking over their shoulders and reporting every question and answer.

Your presence would be intimidating for all parties.
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...609140325/1053

My belief as a student is let things be done with out the involvement of the press, I trust the regents and my campus' leadership to find the right person to lead us. The press feels the need to be everywhere and feel important when it doesn't need to be there. This isn't a life or death deal, but you at the Argus could make a big article about this issue to make yourselves feel special. Argus Leader have a cookie, go out and play, and shut up. Thats just my 2 cents.

[jackmd]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

So, we want Randall Beck sitting there?  (I have never openly criticized the Argus editor so here's the first time:  I have often privately thought the guy is, well, a little goofy at times and simply wrongheaded at other times.

In essence, this is the root of the problem. It then filters down right to the sports page where guys like Chris S. are either converted or leave for a better opportunity. I remember when I left South Dakota and the Argus for Minnesota and the Star Trib and Pioneer Press. Neither are perfect dailys but now that I have returned and the Argus is the state newspaper, I sorely miss the Strib and the PP.

Wonder if the Collegian editor wasn't prodded a bit by Randall or his staff?

[jivebunny]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

I know very little, perhaps nothing, of the qualifications required to be the president of a university.  Given my point of view I can think of nothing appropriate that the general public's participation in this process would offer which would make the process run smoother or the outcome better.  Can anyone else think of any value, specifics please, that the public's input would offer.

So ignorance is good? Is that what I'm hearing. The regents have been done some much secret business in just the last year or so, it's very disturbing. The Argus can be ... really ... um ... self-important. But it's right on this on. And so is (more importantly) the SDSU student paper, The Collegian. I guess those young reporters can play Division I ball, too, huh?

[JackJD]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

So ignorance is good? Is that what I'm hearing. The regents have been done some much secret business in just the last year or so, it's very disturbing. The Argus can be ... really ... um ... self-important. But it's right on this on. And so is (more importantly) the SDSU student paper, The Collegian. I guess those young reporters can play Division I ball, too, huh?

It's hard to tell what you're hearing...perhaps your hearing is selective.  (You seem to take lot of shots about the D1 move, jivebunny.)

Once I understood that the regents were inviting certain constituent groups including the students, to meetings with the candidates, then I can see the point made by the Collegian.  Initially the Argus seemed to argue that it should be present at all of the candidate interviews -- I think that would have been a mistake for reasons I stated earlier on this thread.  The meeting the Collegian sought to report was one in which some students were going to be present.  I think the judge's decision allowing the Collegian to be present was appropriate -- it would be impractical and impossible for all students to be there so if some were there, then the rest should have the opportunity to read about it in the newspaper.

In any event, the point I want to make is this:  I'm pleased to read posts which state the Collegian is improving.  The current editor may be the guy who can return what had been a serious, award-winning college newspaper back to its former glory.  Prior to this year, I had regularly read the Collegian for the past several years and it has been difficult, to say the least (Example:  anyone recall the "advice" column about three or four years ago, written by the female contributor, giving instructions on oral sex? -- not only was the topic off base, it was poorly written and sad...the Collegian that year, with writing not befitting a middle-school monthly paper, went for the no-brainer, easy way to shock and get a few laughs).

USD's Volante, while not a perfect student newspaper, has been much, much better than the Collegian for several years.  I find that unacceptable.  I hope the current staff stays on the correct path and I find it encouraging that the editor stood up for a principle and went to court to back it up. (I may start reading the Collegian again.) 

[West_River_Jack]

Re: Argus Leader Opinion (Pres. search)

[quote author=West-River_Jack link=1157999670/0#12 date=1158090439]I know very little, perhaps nothing, of the qualifications required to be the president of a university.  Given my point of view I can think of nothing appropriate that the general public's participation in this process would offer which would make the process run smoother or the outcome better.  Can anyone else think of any value, specifics please, that the public's input would offer.

So ignorance is good? Is that what I'm hearing. The regents have been done some much secret business in just the last year or so, it's very disturbing. The Argus can be ... really ... um ... self-important. But it's right on this on. And so is (more importantly) the SDSU student paper, The Collegian. I guess those young reporters can play Division I ball, too, huh?[/quote]

I never said anything about ignorance being good!  My point was, and still is, that the job of running South Dakota's largest university is a job that few people understand well enough to have meaningful input for the selection.  The real point of my post is present in the last question.  You ignored it in your reply.  Perhaps you missed it so I will ask again, "Can anyone else think of any value, specifics please, that the public's input would offer?"  Or perhaps you didn't miss it.  Ignoring the question was merely an admission that you too accept that you have nothing meaningful to offer in this decision.  With nothing meaningful to offer, the presence of non-contributory parties would, at best, be an annoying distraction.

My opinion is still that personnel decisions should be conducted privately between the involved parties.  In this case, neither the Argus Leader nor the Collegian, were involved parties.