Notice of OGM June 4th 2018

Notice of OGM June 4th 2018

Do you want to shape and have a say in how NaSTA is run? Now is your chance. Put forward an amendment for the Online General Meeting on the 4th of June or even run for one of the open positions. NaSTA OGM June 2018 Agenda Motions

Order of business

  1. Introduction from Chair and Notices to Meeting
  2. Ratification of minutes from previous Meeting
  3. Update on Made TV partnership
  4. Motions
  5. Confirmation of Election Results
  6. Awards & Conference Host Station 2019 elections
  7. Executive Elections
  8. Returning officer elections
  9. Trustees election
  10. Any other business

 

OGM rules:

  • All candidates will get 60 seconds for an opening statement.
  • Only one vote per station by the station manager or by proxy.
  • If any station managers want to vote via proxy, please email Ryan Andrews with either the name of the person stepping in or your votes before the start of the meeting.

 

How to join the discussion:

  1. Download Discord on your phone, laptop or computer.
  2. Go to http://nasta.tv/ogm and join the discussion
  3. or Search for #NaSTA_ogm_predrinks
  4. Those with voting rights should also see the  #2018-ogm-voting chat.

 

What are we voting on:

  1. Motion 1: Reforming the appeals process for NaSTA awards
    1. Amendment 1
    2. Amendment 2
  2. Motion 2: Limiting alumni roles in judging
  3. Awards and Conference 2019 elections
    1. Demon TV – Tom Evers
    2. NSTV – Joe McGeeghan 
    3. Re-open Nominations
  4. Executive elections
    1. Industry Liaison Officer
      1. Lucy Jo Clumpas – UBTV – Manifesto
      2. Re-open Nominations
    2. Marketing Officer
      1. Sally Patterson – UBTV –  Manifesto
      2. Re-open Nominations
  5. Returning officer elections
    1. Haaris Qureshi – NUTV – Manifesto
    2. Re-open Nominations
  6. Trustee elections
    1. Jenni Herd – GUST – Manifesto
    2. Natasha Siu – LSTV
    3. Seb Cheer – LSTV
    4. Re-open Nominations

 

Motions for Debate

 

Motion 1: Motion to reform the awards appeals process and rule breaks

Proposer: Glasgow University Student Television (GUST)
Seconders: Leeds Student Television (LSTV), Newcastle University Television (NUTV)
Motion alters Clause 4 of the National ​Student Television Association Award Entry Rules​ & Criteria Version 1.0.

The Association Notes:

  1. There is little no information on how to appeal within the NaSTA constitution.
  2. There is no information regarding the rules of late submission and the circumstances in which late entries are accepted.
  3. There are no standardised guidelines of supplying evidence to the Rule Break Committee before the appeal process.
  4. There are no written guidelines which require entries to be sent forward for judging if successfully appealed.
  5. This year, entries which were successfully appealed were not sent forward to the judges.

The Association Believes:

  1. We believe that the appeal process as it currently stands is inherently flawed.
  2. The rulings of acceptable late submission this year are too strict. The three standing accepted grounds for late submissions (Power outage/University server crash, being in possession of an earlier export of the entry in question, and NaSTA submission form errors) do not account for any level of in-station technical issues. This resulted in all technical issues, no matter the severity, being blanket rejected which formed the core reason for 8 Best Broadcaster entries being disqualified this year. As Student Television stations, we believe the appeal system should acknowledge that technical severities can be beyond the control of the station’s members, and their entries should not be penalised because of this.
  3. As there is no constitutionally mandated time limit for submitting appeals, the Executive Committee would be well within their powers to enforce a time limit which is not workable.
  4. Rule breaks and appeals are judged by the same committee which is unfair to the affected stations as the appeal committee should be unbiased and serve as a fresh pair of eyes.
  5. The NaSTA Executive has an internal policy regarding what constitutes mitigating circumstances for appeals, e.g. accepting on the basis of a University wide network error. This policy is not made transparent to stations when appealing which places them at an immediate disadvantage.
  6. Without a clearly outlined appeal system, there is no way a just appeal process can be carried out. This year, entries which were successfully appealed through the system were not even sent to judges due to a lack of constitutional guidance.
  7. Judging begins before the appeal process has ended. This year, by the time the appeal process had ended, there was only two days left of judging before the deadline which formed one of the core reasons for the accepted entries not being sent forward to judges.
  8. Constitutionally, NaSTA strives for clarity and transparency between the establishment and its members. This has not been achieved in this year’s Rule Break and Appeal system.

The Association Resolves:

  1. To define the following timetable for appeals in the Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4:
    • The NaSTA Host Station must send details of all potential rule breaks to the NaSTA Returning Officer and NaSTA Executive within two days of the final submissions deadline.
    • The NaSTA Executive must notify both the host station and all stations affected of the outcome of each rule break within a further two days (four days after submissions close).
    • The NaSTA Executive may ask the submitter of an appeal for additional information, which they have 24 hours to submit from the time of the request.
    • Affected stations then have three days to appeal to the NaSTA Trustee Board.
    • The NaSTA Trustee Board have a further three days to consider all appeals information before notifying the affected stations and NaSTA Host Station.
    • The NaSTA Trustee Board may ask the submitter of an appeal for additional information, which they have 24 hours to submit from the time of the request.
    • The Rule Break and Appeals process must be completed within two weeks of the final submissions deadline.
  2. To define the grounds for what can constitute mitigating circumstances for late submission in the Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4:
    • An error with NaSTA’s submission form or NaSTA supplied files (e.g. title cards)
    • A problem caused by the upload and submission system (not including files taking too long to upload unless the submissions system has significantly slowed the upload process)
    • Loss of power or network connectivity or access to a building which houses a station’s editing, file storage or other related facilities.
    • Severe technical issues beyond the control of the station which results in a loss of data and/or access to or impaired operation of editing facilities
    • An error in communication between a NaSTA representative and a member station which caused failure in the submission process.
    • Any other circumstances which the NaSTA Executive or Trustee Board believe to be completely outside the control of the station.
  3. Define the spirit in which the rules should be interpreted in Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4 as: “The spirit in which these rules should be interpreted is that any problems which are caused by the creation and uploading of entries e.g. slow rendering, running out of storage space, editing software crashing, illness or unavailability of station members (except in extreme circumstances) should not be grounds for mitigating circumstances as they are problems faced by all stations in their day to day activities. Catastrophic technical failures and problems truly beyond the control of the station, such as those outlined in 2.3 above, that could not be planned for or avoided should be grounds for mitigating circumstances to be considered.
  4. To add the following to Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4: “Entries for all award categories, regardless of rule-break violations, will be sent forward for judging upon the closure of the deadline. Any entries which do not pass the appeals process will be withdrawn at the end of the appeals process.
  5. To add the following to Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4: “A full list of all originally submitted entries, accepted Rule Break entries and successful appeals will be sent to the Host Station. The station will then forward all these entries to their respective judges. If a Host Station is uncertain of an entries admission, they must confirm it with the Executive Committee before forwarding any entry. If a Host Station, for any reason, does not send an admitted entry forward to the judge, the NaSTA Executive has the power to personally send all the entries forward.”

Points of information

  • This year 10 Best Broadcaster entries were disqualified from the NaSTA Awards. In 2 cases this was due to technical problems. “Technical problems” were cited in two cases, “slow rendering” was the given reason for two more, and for the remaining six entries no reason was given. Only one station appealed the status of the disqualified entry.
  • The current rule break procedure is laid out as follows in the Award Entry Rules & Criteria V1:
    The NaSTA Rule Break Procedure must be followed for both the NaSTA Awards and the NaSTA People’s Choice Awards.
  1. All entries will be assessed for rule-breaks by the Returning Officer.
  2. Details of any entries found to be in breach of any entry rules will be sent to the NaSTA Executive Committee with a recommendation by the Returning Officer on a suitable course of action.
  3. The NaSTA Executive Committee will decide whether or not to follow this recommendation or follow another course of action. The options available are:
    1. Allow the entry to stand
    2. Withdraw the entry
    3. Allow the video entry to stand but withdraw supporting documents (where applicable)
    4. Allow part of the video entry to stand (and state the timecode of the allowed entry). In this case only the allowed part of the entry will be viewed by the adjudicators.
    5. Allow the entry to stand with the removal and resubmission of any sections or aspects of the content which breaches either the entry rules or NaSTA’s equal opportunities policy or constitution.
    6. Allow the entry on condition that the entrant re-encodes the entry to meet the NaSTA Technical Standards and resubmits within a set timeframe.

 

Motion 1, Amendment 1:

Proposer: Dan Cross (Forge TV)

Seconders: YSTV and SUSUtv

Motion 1 states:

4) To add the following to Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4: “Entries for all award categories, regardless of rule-break violations, will be sent forward for judging upon the closure of the deadline. Any entries which do not pass the appeals process will be withdrawn at the end of the appeals process.

5) To add the following to Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4: “A full list of all originally submitted entries, accepted Rule Break entries and successful appeals will be sent to the Host Station. The station will then forward all these entries to their respective judges. If a Host Station is uncertain of an entries admission, they must confirm it with the Executive Committee before forwarding any entry. If a Host Station, for any reason, does not send an admitted entry forward to the judge, the NaSTA Executive has the power to personally send all the entries forward.”

Amendment

To add the following to Awards Entry & Criteria clause 4:

A full list of all originally submitted entries will be noted upon final closure of the submission deadline by the Host Station and details shared with the Executive Committee. No entries will be sent for judging until completion of the Rule Break and Appeals process. Once the process is completed, the executive committee will issue a final decision on rule-breaks to the host station. This will comprise of a list detailing every entry that has NOT been approved by the Rule Break and Appeals process. On receipt of this list the host station will send all approved entries for judging. This list of decisions is final and neither the host station, executive committee nor the trustee board may change their stance on whether any entry has broken any rules following the issuing of the list.

Reasoning

  • It makes it clearer for judges about what their role is. Instead of trying to withdraw entries from judging, they have a straightforward job and know exactly what to do
  • The host station wouldn’t be required to chase up judges more than necessary. These are industry professionals who may not see every email that they receive, leading to some later appealed entries being accidentally ignored
  • This year a few entries had their rulebreak status changed after entries had been sent to judges. This would make sure this wouldn’t happen again and ensure a much smoother judging process for the host station and executive committee
  • In the original Motion 1, the two points somewhat counteract each other. It feels like “4)” wanted all entries to go to judges regardless and ”5)” only wanted entries that hadn’t broken the rules to go forward to judges

 

Motion 1, Amendment 2:

Proposer: Dan Cross (Forge TV)

Seconders: YSTV and SUSUtv

Amendment

Add the following to the “The Association Resolves” section

To define the who holds what responsibility regarding of communications about the Rule Break and Appeals process in the Awards and Entry Criteria clause 4:

The host station will at the time of sending off potential rule breaks to the Executive Committee contact every station that has submitted entries to inform them of the current status of each of their entries. In this communication the host station shall include the relevant Executive Committee email address to contact in the event of having to participate in the Rule Break and Appeals process.

The host station shall if requested provide any additional information to the Executive Committee or Trustee Board which may help them to carry out the Rule Break and Appeals procedure in a fair manner.

Except from the above, all communication regarding the Rule Break procedure is the sole responsibility of the Executive Committee who will communicate with the relevant stations directly and keep the host station informed.

The Executive Committee shall communicate the relevant Trustee Board email address to any station that has had an entry disqualified through the normal Rule Break procedure to allow the station to choose to appeal this decision.

Except from the above, all communication regarding the Appeals procedure is the sole responsibility of the Trustee Board who will communicate with the relevant stations directly and keep the host station and Executive Committeeinformed.

Reasoning

  • Communication is important, this is an essential part of the Rule Break procedure and needs to be done in a way that is totally traceable and clearly laid out as this can be a very stressful and worrying time for any station involved.
  • All parties involved in this need to be aware of what their responsibilities are in terms of communication to ensure that there is never a time when a station is not informed of what is happening because who is responsible for communicating with them at this point in the procedure is made very clear.

 

Motion 2: Motion to limit alumni role in judging

Proposer: Callum Isaac & Leeds Student Television
Seconder: Glasgow University Student Television

The Association Notes:
4.6.1 – There is no period between a NaSTA affiliated station member leaving their station, and their ability to qualify as a NasTA judge to protect against biases in the judging process.

The Association Believes:
4.6.2 – Several of the judges at the 2018 NaSTA awards have only recently graduated from university and student television. Therefore there is the room for personal bias as the Judges will likely have formed close relationships with current members of the Station. This could mean Judges judging categories with people who they have close personal relationships with. This could create either a positive or negative bias towards the entries whether the Judge is conscious of this or not.

The Association Resolves:
4.6.3. That all Judges at the National Student Television Awards must have not been a member of an affiliated station in the past 24 months. If evidence is not provided, it is assumed that a membership runs from September 1st to September 1st of the following year – with most memberships ending the September following final graduation from university.

Points of information

  1. This motion does not state where this should be defined in the governing documents.
  2. This policy may have implications for the Freshers’ Week Coverage award which is judged by the STAN committee, who judge it in their capacity as members of the committee regardless of their current or previous links to any station.

Elections

Awards and Conference Host Station 2019:
Demon TV – Tom Evers – Manifesto Demon TV Host Bid
NSTV – Joe McGeehan – Manifesto and Host Bid

Industry Liason officer:
Lucy Jo Clumpas – UBTV

Marketing officer:
Sally Patterson – UBTV

Returning officer:
Haaris Qureshi – NUTV – Manifesto

Student Trustees:
Jenni Herd – GUST – Manifesto
Natasha Siu – UBTV
Seb Cheer – UBTV