[CW] New ARRL Code Proficiency Certificate Program

[Richard Knoppow]

    What you describe below is a violation of some pretty 
fundamental publishing ethics. At one time legitimate news media 
was very careful not to publish advertising that looked like news 
stories or even to have advertising adjacent to a news story 
about that company or product. Then they discovered they could 
make a lot of extra money by violating those rules. I don't know 
when that started, it certainly pre-dated Rupert Murdoch.
     The ARRL is mostly a lobbying organization. It began to 
lobby the government to allow amateur radio to continue after 
WW-1. It did a pretty good job. It has also represented amateur 
radio at international conferences where otherwise amateurs would 
have had no say. It is probably not cheap to run. I suspect the 
management must scramble for enough income to do the job. But 
they are a tax-exempt non-profit and are somewhat limited in what 
they can do to generate revenue. Selling advertising in the 
magazine is a legitimate method but the example given is a clear 
violation of both publishing ethics and the duty to be honest 
with the membership. Very bad. I think the financial realities 
require the membership to be vigilant about how the organization 
is operated. I think your letter was an example but there should 
have been a great many of them.

On 7/14/2019 11:21 AM, Steve WD8DAS via CW wrote:
> 
> That's true Bill.  The only hope I see in these situations is to 
> providefeedback to the organization. If the leaders of the group 
> don't hear member perspectives they'll just trust each other's 
> "great ideas" and perpetuate these tendencies.  It can be a 
> reality-check for the otherwise isolated leadership.
> 
> I remember an example of this:  Some years back the ARRL 
> advertising dept sold a full-page ad in QST which was styled to 
> look just like a real Product Review and it was placed among the 
> other real reviews.  I wrote to the President and others pointing 
> out how misleading this is and how it would undermine what had 
> become a trusted ARRL member service - reasonably unbiased 
> equipment reviews.  The ad sales manager replied that it was too 
> bad if I didn't like it - it was is the modern way to advertise 
> and my opinion didn't matter.  I responded pointing out that ARRL 
> is a member organization and our opinions should matter.  The 
> others that I cc'ed seemed to understand my point and I don't 
> believe they've run any more of those ads.
> 
> 
> Steve WD8DAS


-- 
Richard Knoppow
1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com
WB6KBL