Inba in Agora will take any time, but published yesterday message about the “resignation” of the board associate Agnieszka Sadowska, who unexpectedly found for herself “other professional plans” shows the direction of changes. We don't know who's gonna win here yet, but we already know who lost.
The life of an agor corpomenade must be more breathtaking than a tiger trainer in Louisiana. In June, Agnieszka Sadowska planned to oversee the merger of the portal with “Gazeta Wyborcza”. July isn't over yet, and this is weird!
They always leave like this. As long as they are in power, they give themselves laudations on corpoivents and receive millions of bonuses for their infallible decisions.
And then they disappear. These “other plans” seem to have in secret services, for (with fewer exceptions) it is vain to search them on the boards of another companies.
For example, where did Sadowska's predecessor – a associate of Robert Musiusz? Or his predecessor? I ask with genuine curiosity, I have traded a small with these people in various negotiations – and I have a feeling of conversation interrupted in half a sentence. I'd love to ask them after years how they're reminiscing and everything.
Since another stock companies do not invitation them to their boards, I see 2 options. Either Agora has a terrible hand for managers, or another companies make the mistake of letting specified talents be wasted.
I can't compose about it without being bitter. I've devoted almost a 4th of a century to this company. I can't take care of all this.
My bitterness is all the more so that erstwhile they tried to fire me disciplinaryly, the main charge was that by sending communications to unionists, I would exposure the company to leaks. Meanwhile, there have been leaks that I would never allow.
I regret now that I was so limited as a unionist. It seems I cared more about this company than the people at the top who started the June war on leaks and communications.
Too late I dared to go out with disputes outside the company – for steps specified as asking to inspect work for control. Unfortunately, this is simply a bit like a satisfaction bet – an inspection cannot punish an employer very much, it can only urge him not to do certain things again. So she recommended (seeking if the board would care).
Incidentally, if there were at least a shred of fact in the tales of the Wosi and Okrasek about the “social face of the Law” Law and Justice would primarily strengthen the inspection of work. In fact, it is only increasingly powerless (like the full budgetary sphere).
The moral of my successors in the relation is that they shouldn't care about leaks. Especially since we've already been trained in combat, that a unionist can't be fired disciplinaryly.
My bitterness increases, that virtually all participants of the June war – a associate of Sadowska, president Hojka, editors of Kursk and Wójcik – I said that for Agora it is destructive to deficiency an early conflict prevention system. It was in front of the witnesses, so they won't deny it.
Difficult decisions in this company are made without consulting the subordinates. BANG! – abruptly you are faced with a fact made. The decision was made, only a insignificant formality, your signature. There will be no negotiations.
Sometimes it works. A amazed and frightened man signs what he gets.
Sometimes, however, he simply says no. People – we have the right to do so! This was the beginning of this war in June, and so it looked with an effort to release me and with respective earlier inbs that fortunately did not go outside the company (but long lived the corridor gossip).
I said in meetings with management: wouldn't it be better to reverse the order? First negotiate/consult and then make drastic decisions?
At worst, the scandal will be the same (but a small later). The optimistic could be avoided by uncovering a compromise satisfactory to all parties.
I've always heard the same answer from management. That Agora must surprise employees with decisions, due to the fact that as a stock company he is obliged to act discreetly.
Then they acted discreetly. Discretely like the spectra of quantum hamiltonate a harmonic oscillator. Board members should give themselves a million-dollar bonus for this galaxy championship in discretion.
My bitterness does not send me (hopefully) the essence of the matter. due to the fact that this is not just a "who" dispute.
In class at Collegium Civitas, I usage Michael Mann's movie “Informer“ as teaching material. The 4 fundamental issues of journalistic ethics (Chinese wall, protection of sources, due integrity, public interest) are highlighted there by excellent actors, mainly Al Pacino (he gives an excellent repost to the question "Are you suggesting that the board members are guided by financial motives" in the script.
My classes are about the net and social media, so I request this movie mainly to illustrate the thesis that in online journalism these 4 rules are hard to recreate. How can you have a “Chinese wall” between business and editorial if you are begging for a donite, producing sales texts about “a car filled with technology” (“price? good!”)?
In the “Gazeta Wyborcza” this Chinese wall is respected. In practice, this is due to the fact that the board cannot give instructions to editors due to the fact that there is no direct submission. Therefore, for example, the board might have tried to fire me, but he could not urge the editor to halt publishing me (which would have been worse for me; NOW it's all meaningless to me).
There's no specified discrimination on the portal. They could have been ordered by the board to “close the opinion section”. The “election” of specified commands cannot be issued.
Integration according to the first version would mean the end of the "Chinese Wall" and the rigid submission of the "Gazeta Wyborcza" to the board (in the practice of Agnieszka Sadowska). Although he later issued a message saying that they did not want to endanger journalistic independency in anything, the union activity taught me that erstwhile these people say that Paris lies in France, it should be checked on the map.
Since the German President's squad flew in 2013 I am sorry, I retreat these words, of course not "flyed", but unexpectedly made "other plans", and since then there have been no people associated with "Gazeta Wyborcza".
These people are like Barea: “the husband is by profession a associate of the board.” Corpomenders are not journalists, they are not curious in our sacred rules.
I don't blame them. I'd be yawning, too, if they started telling me something with their jargon about their world, about the arks of controlling financial reporting in marketing.
The perfect of the “Chinese wall” is to separate both worlds. Journalists write, editors edit, controllingers study controlling.
With journalistic independency is like free speech, verbally everyone is in favour. And the biggest supporters are Orban and Kaczyński. so verbal declarations are irrelevant.
My fingers crossed for uncovering specified a fresh expression for “Gazeta Wyborcza” that will keep the “Chinese wall” principle. And this must be recorded in the form of statutory and legal guarantees – oral promises of board members are flatus vocis. I learned what they say in American films, the hard way.
I hope the editorial negotiators know that and will negociate as hard as possible. Protip: I've been negotiating various sad issues with different boards since 2011, I've learned that it doesn't make sense to be good to agor corpomenediers. They don't appreciate it, they interpret it as weakness, and they punch harder.
Personally, I am glad that I found “other plans” for myself last year. If I am banned from printing due to this blogophone – well, as I would put it to students, effort to imagine a cauliflower dangling on an eleven-dimensional superstring...
