l3wis

NOVEMBER 15, 2007 – teeny-weeny-mini-me-micro-managers

11-15-07.jpg

*NOTE: This is my first post on the Keloland Political Blog Forum, I am now officially a member.

The Washington Pavilion Management is making some changes, including looking to hire a new Executive Director, and some (mini-me) low-level directors.

I never thought Steve Hoffman (former Executive Director) was the main reason behind stagnant growth at the Pavilion. I liked Steve, and at one time considered him a friend. He is a bright person who has an extensive knowledge of the arts. The growth problem lies with the stifling Board of Directors & their continued insistence to hire a laundry list of mini-micro-managers (They call them DIRECTORS).

Once again the Washington Pavilion Management just doesn’t get it, and hiring a slough of new management isn’t going to help matters. The solution? Hire a strong leader (Executive Director) who can wear many hats at once. Besides the Executive Director also have strong department managers that can lead their staff successfully without having three tiered teeny-weeny managers. This will save the Pavilion money in salaries (their biggest expenditure every year) and ensures the employee’s mission remains concise and clear. Also, change the Board of Directors into an advisory board that has no conflicts of interest with the institution itself. This will create the opportunity for the Executive Director to make quick decisive decisions without board approval. Time is money and this will benefit the bottom line also.

I’m not opposed to subsidizing the Pavilion every year ( Argus Leader reporter Jay Kirschenmann conveniently misquoted me that I was). I just think that the subsidy should go towards taking chances on more progressive entertainment, setting up a solid endowment and updating and maintaining exhibits instead of inflated salaries for the up-teen managers that work there.

How does that old saying go? “Too many . . . .

Oh, yeah, one more thing; knock off the secrecy and censorship to, it doesn’t benefit public perception of you.

WHERE THE HECK IS THE FOURTH ESTATE THESE DAYS?

The term Fourth Estate refers to the press, both in its explicit capacity of advocacy and in its implicit ability to frame political issues. The term goes back at least to Thomas Carlyle in the first half of the 19th century.

It seems as of late the press has become more advertorial (advertising disguised as actual news stories) then informational. Some examples on a national level are the selling of the Iraq War and on a local level the endless coverage of Sanford Health by print and TV media.

There are some basic reasons why this has happened; media has become huge conglomerates that no longer care about getting the story, just the advertising dollars. They choose more often then not to ignore certain news items fearing they will lose advertisers.

Just look at all the Women’s magazines in Sioux Falls? Do any of them have content that is news worthy? Do any of them cover politics?

I think the Fourth Estate still exists, loosely. Blogs have become the new Fourth Estate.

Is everything true that we read on the blogs? No. But neither is our mainstream media either. The advantage the internets has over TV or print media is you can sort out the info on your own. Blogs are edgier then other media sources too, they don’t sugarcoat the news. Many great stories have broken on blogs (Monica Lewinsky scandal for instance, and the the Moveon.org Petraseus ad comes to mind).

There is a part of me that wishes I was still a part of the print media, but I will admit I have met some interesting people through my blog and have heard some pretty good stories to (stuff you will never see in our local media).

Eventually the OLD Fourth Estate will no longer be able to ignore the NEW Fourth Estate. I’m hoping the 2008 election cycle proves this.