A Continuing Look At The Obstacles We Face
Aero-Analysis/Commentary by James R. Campbell, ANN
Editor-In-Chief/Rabble-Rouser
While yesterday's Intermezzo was a
welcome relief from some of the gloomy topics we've addressed in
this editorial series, it's time to get back to brass tacks. In
Part 5, we'll discuss something unusual… a problem that
presents some really intriguing solutions (if properly addressed),
but for now, let's chat about the 'elephant in the room' -
the declining stature of some of aviation's many and varied
associations and organizations.
And before we get into this particular topic… one
deserving of an entire segment of this editorial series, let me
note this from the outset. A few years ago, you would have been
hard-pressed to find a more supportive editorial position for the
mission of AOPA, EAA and other groups than that espoused by ANN. We
supported and believed in the mission of these organizations with
few reservations… and had great faith in the direction and
leadership of all those involved… but since then, something
has changed - and we'll leave it to you to decide what that might
be… We had great respect for the actions of AOPA's Phil
Boyer and have always had a deep and abiding affection for the
spirit of the EAA that Paul Poberezny created… but something
seems amiss with a few of our pivotal aero-groups…at a time
when we need their best and most effective efforts, NOW, more than
ever.
Let me make this clear... no one wants to admire and laud the
efforts of our associations more than we do… but if they're
not doing the job… we need to speak up. While there are some
groups that appear to be doing better than most (AEA, ICAS, GAMA,
NATA, and some aspects of NBAA), we really need to insist that the
alphabet groups stay on track.
The Decline of Organized Aviation
The associations are not what they used to be, and in many cases
we have only to look at the mirror to see the reasons for that - we
get that which we support with our membership dollars. And yet, the
decline of many of today's aviation organizations is terrifying --
some more than others -- while a very few still show promise,
initiative and (at times) brilliance in meeting our needs. Today's
AOPA has evolved in some puzzling ways and become quite different
than what it was under Phil Boyer… and I not only don't
like what I see, I'm truly concerned about it. This AOPA can often
be arrogant, unresponsive, poorly directed, and seems like it's
wandering in the wilderness looking for direction and the way back
to its proper mission, and some of their 'misses' are truly bizarre
-- I mean, for God sakes, the AOPA Wine Club? There
isn't something more important to do with their resources?
Give me a break!
The associations are constantly
putting their hands out for more bucks… and then spending
those dollars in puzzling ways… some of them in direct
conflict with their own members and affiliated industry companies.
And just as puzzling, there has been an outward migration of some
truly talented folks from these groups - with EAA and AOPA both
losing valuable staffers and/or Board members who were asked to
leave or simply could not countenance what they saw as destructive
paths for the organizations they once supported so avidly.
Example: How do you validate a rumored $700K+
expenditure for a below-par 'AOPA-Live' effort at last year's
so-called 'Summit' - allowing the organization to cover itself
with a scorched earth effort so that it could drown out
everyone else (which we believe and have been told is nothing more
than an attempt to control the coverage the organization receives
by inundating the online world with so much poorly configured
content accrued at tremendous and inexplicable expense, that it
drowns everything else out - especially anything that even hints at
true criticism). There's little doubt that AOPA, in the absence of
its former mandates, specifically those dedicated to the true
interests of its constituency, has gone "Off-Mission" and needs an
immediate and drastic course correction if it's going to maintain
its proper standing as an effective advocate for GA. If they
don't understand this, then maybe the AOPA Wine Club is a little
more active than we fear…
We have so much more that concerns us, of late… but the
very recent publication of media coverage restrictions and
guidelines for the renamed AOPA Summit is but more disturbing
hand-writing on the wall… both for what it means, directly,
but for how those new rules might be used to control coverage of
the event (and it, in fact, does direct the limits and conduct of
much of the overage we had envisioned for this year's event). AOPA
has specifically restricted some forms of coverage and requires
their blessing for several other media programs… and there
is a hint, throughout the doc, that seems to suggest that if you
don't do what they want, they can ask you to leave. This is a new
policy… and we have confirmed that nothing like this existed
under previous management. Further; we have to admit that we've
been concerned about this for a while… as certain AOPA
personnel sought to, and oft succeeded, in curtailing ANN and other
media outlet's access to various aspects of some previous AOPA
events.
God only knows what they're afraid of… but I specifically
remember Phil Boyer's counter to Sun 'n Fun's ridiculous banning
order of yours truly some years ago in which Phil not only noted
that AOPA would never put such restrictions on a working
journalist… but proudly insisted that they had no fear of
proper journalism… so that they had no need to even think of
restricting media access. THAT was an AOPA that I was proud to
support… and one that never sought to control my access or
coverage of their events - even when Phil and I didn't see eye to
eye (as a matter of fact, I've rarely encountered someone who
enjoyed a respectful 'argument' more…).
EAA is not blameless either… they blew an amazing
opportunity to gain a year's start on new leadership by jacking
around Pete Bunce while also playing the Media-Control card at
Oshkosh/AirVenture… with a list of things we were told we
were not allowed to do… at this Federally-Funded public-use
airport supported by a worldwide membership and industry that could
use all the media and exposure it can get (and yes, EAA is trying
to drown some of the other media outlets out as well… but
not nearly to the extend as that shown by the control freaks
overseeing AOPA's media policy).
New leadership, recently announced by EAA, gives us hope for the
future (and trusted insiders tell us this guy, Rod Hightower, may
indeed be the real deal… but we remain skeptical until we
see the evidence), but if EAA is going to maintain a position of
prominence, if not relevance, it needs to get back in touch with
its membership… and also look back to Paul Poberezny's
founding mission statements to get and stay on track. Paul was not
a perfect leader… but there is no question that he
understood the true spirit of aviation… and aviators…
and the EAA of old was a beautiful thing to behold before it became
overtly commercialized, insular and somewhat restrictive. And
yet… I still love these organizations (AOPA and EAA)…
both for what they used to stand for and for what I desperately
hope that they might stand for yet again.
Most important of all… how can the
associations ask for our support when they don't think enough of us
to give us a direct voice in choosing their leadership?
Ask AOPA, EAA, and a number of other
associations how their leadership comes into being and you'll be
rewarded with a description of a twisting-turning, bizarre,
in-bred, Keystone Kops set of rules and bylaws that are designed to
allow those that currently run these organization to keep doing
what they want to do without the "interference" of the little
people like you and I. If they want our support, they have to
respect each and every one of us enough to be responsive to us to
the point where we have a direct say in how these organizations are
lead, staffed and directed. In a constitutional democracy, it is
bizarre to note that such member associations eschew the very basic
tenets of the liberty that created this nation and inspires much of
the rest of the world to bigger and better things.
And finally, we need to look at the role associations
should be playing… they need to refine and whittle down
their mission statements to something that actually produces a
proper benefit -- and no more -- they need to quit interfering with
the rest of the industry in those areas where the industry is doing
just fine by itself (i.e., associations should not be insurance
companies, wine merchants, investment counselors, PR Agencies,
travel agents, 'news' agencies or take on other roles that get in
the way of other industry business - or compete directly with
businesses run by various members of its own organization - talking
about eating your young!), they need to quit playing ego games and
hoisting up their leadership as Demigods, they need to quit
fighting with other associations, they need to practice complete
transparency, they need to quit being greedy/hyper fund-raising
entities simply for the sake of playing cash cow, and they need to
be completely and unerringly run at the behest of, and for the
benefit of, their constituency.
Final-Final Note: We
do not level these criticisms lightly and mean them to be read
carefully in the hope that they might induce/inspire a positive
change. But we're also not unaware that there is a great feeling of
unrest within the SportAv and GA community. Recent responses to a
short ANN editorial examining the more unsatisfactory aspects of
recent AOPA fundraising efforts produced over 2600 responses in a
matterof a few days... with less than a dozen of those telling us
that we were all wet... and the rest overtly supportive -- the
majority of which indicated that they had either discontinued, were
thinking of discontinuing, or were going to discontinue their
membership. AOPA insiders tell us that there is concern over
declining membership numbers and the possibility that membership
could slip below 400,000 in 2011... negating some of the impressive
gains made by the association in past years... and providing yet
another worrisome stat for us to ponder as we attempt to revitalize
aviation.
Personal Note To Aero-Alphabet Groups:
Don't you dare tell me, or any other aviation journalist, that a
legitimate question about your association (or its
activities) is none of our business or limit the coverage we
try to undertake… you don't have the right… like it
or not. Our responsibility as journalists (for the few of us that
actually practice the craft) is to check on the
transparency/opacity of the Emperor's wardrobe as often as
possible. That's how things work in a proper, democratic,
principled society. If you don't like our questions or coverage (so
long as we are respectful), you'd best reconsider the true source
of your angst and be prepared to look in the mirror… as it
means we're simply doing our jobs. -- JRC.
Next… There used to be a time
when Flying Clubs were a prevalent and popular aspect of the GA and
Sport Aviation landscape… and in the last few decades,
they've all but disappeared. However; a revitalized and modified
version of such entities… relevant to the 2010
generation… might provide inestimable value to rebuilding
the popularity, affordability and accessibility of GA. And by the
way... while we seem to be throwing some rocks at certain entities
in aviation, do be advised that some of the toughest criticism we
have coming up is for our own ilk... and the truly
deplorable state of aviation journalism.
More to follow in the coming days… Stay tuned!
Jim Campbell -- Unrepentant Aero-Advocate, Professional
Trouble-Maker/Pain-In-The-Ass/Aero-Evangelist (YOU Choose which one
truly applies)