Re: REAL Mag?
(no name) ((no email))
Fri, 26 Jan 1996 10:22:29 -0600
Greg wrote:
(from what I wrote earlier):
>"Scouters' Journal is a print magazine and a really great one at that, to
>respond to the lack of REAL Scouting stories and information found in
>the official BSA's magazine. It's being printed and published on a
>shoestring and a prayer (or two) by a great Scouter in the midwest!"
>
>Mike,
>
>Scouting magazine stories are REAL stories. Most articles are written by
>volunteer writers that are scouters, just like you and me.
While many of the articles found in _Scouting_ are written or co-written
by volunteers like both of us, the slant of the magazine is geared toward
the BSA's promotional efforts. There is NO conversation about contriversies
within the program, NO conversation between Scouters on uniform issues,
and definately NO differing opinion other than the "official BSA lines".
That's what I'm referring to as "REAL" Scouting stories. A story about
how the Mayo Clinic is running an Exploring program or how a Council
conducted a spring camporee (in a fall edition) is not really "REAL"...
a story about how a Clinic is trying for the FOURTH TIME to organize an
Explorer Post and explainations on what happened the three previous times
or a story on how a Camporee fell apart and what could be done to prevent
YOUR camporee from death like this one ARE what *I* would call "REAL
STORIES".
(you know, the kind you will find here on Scouts-L!)
This is to be expected..._Scouting_, after all, IS the official
magazine of the BSA and speaks to ALL volunteers and professionals.
Therefore, they are NOT going to "tell the negative sides" of issues or problems
.
However, _Scouters'_Journal_, is a magazine aimed at telling the WHOLE
Scouting story, not just the "cleaned up" version which you will find
in the BSA publication. You will find SJ very refreshing, a lot more
entertaining, and NOT a complete duplication of what you will read in _Scouting_
.
> If you or others
>have a concern with the quality of the articles I would suggest addressing
>them to the editor, specifying which artcles are 'not REAL' and which writers
>are 'not great scouters'.
I've talked PERSONALLY with the staff of _Scouting_ over the past
*seventeen* years (this is 1996 - since 1979!), including Robert
Peterson, Scott Daniels and W.E. "Billy" Buttersworth, Greg. While
they are trying to produce a quality magazine (and it IS a quality,
award-winning in-house publication, no doubt or argument there!), it
is a BSA magazine and those articles which get placed there supports
the BSA's point of view and ONLY the "good side" of how our program's
working. Scouters here have constantly wrote and called the magazine
whenever Scouts appear with incorrect uniforms, when Scouters are
standing in photos with, let's call them, "outfits", okay; and have been
asking them as I've asked "Why don't you spend more time with things that
don't work out the way they should, and explain more of the inner
workings of the BSA's programs!"
For instance, in the preparation of the current issue, Terry Howerton
asked all of us about our opinions and feelings on "where the
BSA should be going" in the marketing and promotion of the program.
Many of our opinions, which don't match up with the way the BSA chooses to
market our programs, appear in the current issue.
>Much effort goes into each issue of Scouting Magazine and to criticise it as
>anything less shows a poor attitude. If you do not enjoy the magazine, then
>you have the choice not to read it. But, please don't try to demean a great
>magazine that is a part of the scouting movement. While the movement is not
>perfect (Whom among us is?), I am proud to be a member of the BSA!
Unfortunately, while I and other Scouters do have the option of NOT
reading _Scouting_, there was no other source of getting information
on how Scouting is REALLY done in the USA. You won't find "My Meeting's
a Disaster!" in _Scouting_, because the emphasis is on positively
promoting the program, and NOT in "expressing all points of view". It
SHOULD be that way, because that's what _Scouting_ is all about!!
I wasn't demeaning the magazine; rather, I am promoting SJ as a viable
alternative to the self-promotion which goes on within the pages of
_Scouting_. It's fact. Pick up any edition of _Scouting_ and you will
find articles which are written to get you "pumped up" to do a better
job, or to confirm your faith in the program. I enjoy reading _Scouting_
and look forward to each edition. However, I also enjoy reading SJ.
For instance, I have picked two issues from the immediate past (Nov-Dec
84 and Oct 1994) and have reviewed the articles in both before I posted
this. You are absolutely correct in your statement that volunteers *do*
contribute articles for publication. In the 84 issue, there's THREE
articles written by volunteers (out of fourteen, not counting the
"regular features"). In 1994, there's THREE articles (FIVE if you count
the two written by Bob Hood, whom retired from the profession in 1986
and still writes occasionally for _Scouting_ and _Exploring_) from a
listing of fifteen, including the "Scouting on the Internet" article
which was written by a staff member.
In each issue, Front Line Stuff answers a "volunteer's question" (Are
there uses for computers in troop management and software availability
in 84; den meetings which have been disrupted by parents dropping off
younger brothers and sisters in 94). You WON'T FIND, however, "My DE's
a pain in the rear end...what can we do to replace him?" in Front Line
Stuff. Nor will you find "While we are pleased with the way our Troop
is being run, is there any other training courses outside of the BSA's
that we can take our youth leaders to?" (please note, Greg, that Front
Line Stuff IS getting better, because Bob Peterson gets SOME questions
and SOME input from sources outside the BSA's traditional "trail"...)
Again, Greg, _Scouting_ is a internal publication of the BSA, and it
does it's job extremely well. However, it does not allow for the
two-way, free-flowing, confrontational conversation (note the word "conversation
") that SJ does. And SJ is written by volunteers primarily,
although there's some contributions by professionals and former pros.
"Conversation" because although _Scouting_ tells how units have done
exceptional things, promotes how well Councils can raise monies or how
well they can run summer camp operations, it does NOT answer with each
issue how can the Scoutmaster run a more effective Troop or Team
operation; it does NOT address BOTH SIDES of a contriversial issue; and
doesn't allow for negativity in the program (and let's face it, gang:
not EVERYTHING goes well ALL of the time!).
I read BOTH magazines, Greg. My preference is to SJ.
(disclaimer: I don't hold ANY stock in _Scouters'_Journal_. I have
sent three articles to SJ but then, I've sent fourteen to _Scouting_
or _Exploring_. I know some of the staff of _Scouting_, but then, I've
talked with Terry Howerton and some other Scouters that serve as the
core of SJ. _Scouting_ comes to me as part of registration fees; SJ comes
to me through a personal subscription. From the start, I have supported
several viable alternatives to the official magazines, but have found
all until this one lacking in the style which matches the official ones.)
Settummanque!
(MAJ) Mike L. Walton (Settummanque, the blackeagle) (
co-Owner, Blackeagle Servics of Kentucky (502.826.7046) __)_
174 Chapelwood Drive, Henderson, Kentucky 42420-5036 | ** |]
(H) 502.827.9201 (F) 502.826.7046 (W) (to be announced) coffee? anytime!
(Email) blackeagle@hcc-uky.campus.mci.net/kyblkeagle@AOL.COM
"Geoworks & Leaders' Online--because EVERY PC can open doors!!!"
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City | 
