Memorandum Re: Episcopal Communicators by the Rev. Erwin Soukup
Diocesan Press Service. October 2, 1974 [74265]
NOTICE TO ALL CHURCH COMMUNICATORS: The following is a resume of notes taken at a meeting of the Executive Board of the Episcopal Communicators, the Executive Council Program Group on Communications, and the Executive Council Communications Staff, September 22-23, 1974, at the Episcopal Church Center, New York City.
Present were Episcopal Communicators: Richard Anderson (New York), Isabel Baumgartner (Tennessee), Polly Bond (Ohio), Betty Gray (New York), John Lockerby (Olympia), and Erwin Soukup (Chicago); Program Group: Lueta Bailey, Robert Parks (Chairman), Robert F. Royster, and Walker Taylor, Jr.; Staff: Margaret Andersen, Walter Boyd, Sonia Francis, and John Goodbody.
The meeting began at 8:30 p.m. with prayer, and Erwin Soukup read a pro- posed agenda, inviting additions from Program Group members and Staff, drawn up after consultation with the Executive Board of the Episcopal Communicators, and it was decided to proceed on an item-by-item basis.
WORKSHOPS AND CONFERENCES:
Soukup introduced the item, and Anderson said it complimented what other national groups (such as education) are doing on local and regional levels. Royster said there is no problem with the philosophy or idea of having regional communications conferences but that he sees some difficulty in getting these financed through the national communications budget. Goodbody said there is about 20 or 25 thousand dollars in the national budget for consultations, but he added that some of this will be used for regional meetings of people working in electronic media. M. Andersen spoke about regional and local contacts she has made in Coalition 14 and the Diocese of Bethlehem. Anderson supported this on-going work but again stressed the need for workshops to help diocesan editors improve skills. Gray said the workshops would benefit the more narrow concern of diocesan press editors rather than the broader concern of general communications. Parks asked how such conferences would be run; Anderson replied that the national staff, Program Group and communicators Board would work together in planning and executing them.
MEETINGS OF BISHOPS WITH COMMUNICATORS:
The communicators Board noted the recent contacts between communicators and bishops in the Roman Catholic Church and suggested something of this sort for our Church. Baumgartner asked how many of our bishops would attend such a meeting. Parks said he thought the Presiding Bishop's interest in communication would cause some of the bishops to attend. M. Andersen said some provinces are already interested in this.
ADDITIONAL MEMBERSHIPS ON PROGRAM GROUP:
The communicators Board suggested more non-Council members be appointed as "additional members" on the Program Group, particularly to share in the budget- making and decision-making. Parks gave the background of the council's new way of operating regarding program groups. Bailey and Taylor said additional members could be added. Bailey suggested an annual meeting of longer duration between Program Group and the communcators' Board as a possible alternative to more additional members on the Program Group. Several communicators liked this idea, but expressed the desire for this whether or not members are added to the Group.
The discussion then centered on "who are the Episcopal Communicators?", and it was decided the description as included in the proposed agenda of the meeting answered this as well as anything:
"The Episcopal Communicators is an informal, self-supporting, deeply concerned group of communications persons who see the purpose of communication as the creating of community...
"The Episcopal Communicators' membership is open to all national and diocesan communications persons, personnel with regional and national Church publications and communications, and employees of the secular media...
"The Episcopal Communicators was founded on several basic tenets which undergird the group's continuing thought and action:
A. Communication is a trust-relation based on honesty
B. Communication is always at least two-way
C. Communication facilitates problem-solving and decision-making
D. Decision-making always involves those who are affected by the decision
E. Sharp distinction is to be made between communication and promotion
F. The communicator's ultimate responsibility is not to the institution but to the people he/she serves."
Parks said additional members for the Program Group would provide good "resources persons," giving it a broader viewpoint.
At this point the meeting adjourned until 9 am the following morning...
when
Parks read the Council's rule on additional members of program groups and it was agreed that the Program Group had heard the desire of the communicators for additional members and that this would be considered.
At this point, Taylor brought up the report of the "ad hoc" Communications Task Force, appointed by Bishop Allin and chaired by Hiram Neuwoehner of St. Louis. Soukup asked for clarification of his relationship with this "ad hoc" committee. He said he was not asked, as he was earlier informed he would be, to review the draft of the report of the Task Force. It was pointed out that the report was in rough draft stage and perhaps not ready yet for evaluation by the communicators and other groups. The communicators said they would be happy to respond to the report.
POLICY REGARDING DIOCESAN PRESS SERVICE:
Anderson introduced the concerns of Ben Campbell and some others regarding the switchboarding policy of the Diocesan Press Service (DPS), and there was a lengthy discussion of the DPS function, limitations, scope, etc. The difficulty of getting impartial reporting of meetings such as those of the Standing Liturgical Commission was discussed, with the Program Group members reminding all that the Executive Council has little or no influence over these commissions. Anderson said it was DPS policy on what to switchboard and what not to switchboard that was of concern to the communicators. Goodbody spoke about the non-switchboarding of the Babs Zimmerman release, Churchwork, (Diocese of Louisiana), April, 1974, explaining that this came at the time of the beginning of Bishop Allin's tenure as Presiding Bishop, and that was the chief reason why it was killed. Boyd assured all that he does not have to clear press releases with anyone; sometimes he decides to get clarification from national staff people, but only when he feels it is necessary. Gray said more hard news should be circulated through DPS, and more hard news, she said she was certain, would be welcomed by DPS. The communicators agreed they should do more in the way of sending items for switchboarding.
Anderson then offered a summary of what had been accomplished - at 11 a.m.:
1. The Program Group had heard the communicators' desire for regional workshops designed to improve local communications skills;
2. The Program Group was willing to consider more "additional members" to the Group, but cautioned that these might not be diocesan press people but perhaps people from the electronic media, but they would be local communicators;
3. There would be "continuity" between the Program Group and the communicators' Board; perhaps an annual meeting such as this Setpember 22-23 effort;
4. DPS policy would be completely open switchboardlng, with DPS retaining the right to give "special handling" to any items deserving the same in the opinion of Walter Boyd;
5. A request for a calendar of Church events of general importance and interest was made by the Episcopal Communicators in order to assure opportunity for broader press coverage. Goodbody explained the difficulty.of keeping track of the multitude of meetings and events of the various Church groups, and he said many events are already assigned out for switchboarding through DPS to local editors. The communicators' Board assured cooperation in any stepped-up operation of this nature;
6. Communicators could ask for some funding to finance speakers, etc., at their annual communicators meeting. Taylor said this was good policy and a policy followed in other areas of the Church. Bailey said other sources of income should also be looked into. Parks offered the opinion that to remain independent in action, the communicators should look to independent sources of funding.
Isabel Baumgartner brought up two additional items:
1. The Executive Council Newsletter to all clergy, issued by the Program Group and produced by Seabury Press. Most of the communicators said it was not necessary; Lockerby disagreed and said it was a useful tool for clergy; Program Group members said clergy cannot find out about Council decisions in many areas of the country because of no diocesan newspaper coverage and slow coverage by other media;
2. Better press relations by the Presiding Bishop, including advance press Information provided before he comes to a locale of the Church. important to local secular press. All agreed this to be a good point, and Goodbody agreed to carry this to the Presiding Bishop.
Regret was expressed by all that Benjamin Campbell (Virginia), a member of the Episcopal Communicators Board, was ill and could not be present.
All constituencies of the September 22-23 meeting felt it was a significant encounter and was most helpful. It was decided to meet again.
Richard J. Anderson
Polly Bond
Isabel Baumgartner
John Lockerby
Betty Gray
Erwin Soukup, chairman