• Leadership
• Diversity
• Term Limits
• Corporate Funding
• Focus on Education
• Discourse
• Recycling
• Duplication
• Conflict of Interest / Disclosure
• Funding
• Debate

Leadership
The AMLA will position itself as a leader in media literacy education by defining, identifying, disseminating, and innovating excellent, evidence-based practices for the field. This type of work will take precedence over serving as a clearinghouse that uncritically assembles the work of others.

[top]

Diversity
AMLA is committed to attracting membership and leadership that reflect the diversity of the communities in which we work and live.

[top]

Term Limits
To ensure the continued expansion of leadership in the field of media literacy, AMLA national board members will serve no longer than three consecutive terms (6 years) without taking at least one year off before running for a board position again. The only exception will be for board members ascending to the presidency, where board experience is an important prerequisite for office. A president's term limit begins when they take office as president, irrespective of how many consecutive years they have served on the national board.

[top]

Corporate Funding

By definition, media literacy skills include the ability to analyze media messages. Given that definition, acceptance of corporate funds, especially from media companies, may give the appearance of a conflict of interest. The AMLA Board is aware of this perception and has given the issue much consideration.

Recognizing the need for both credibility and independence, the AMLA's bylaws give complete control of the organization to its members. Funders are welcome to provide input in an advisory capacity, but they get no vote. As outlined in our funding policy, which is posted on our website, we follow a process in which the board determines a course of action and then seeks funding to support our decisions. We do not find a funder and then set policy according to the desires of the funder.

In addition, we expect to become fully self-sustaining through membership dues. So while we welcome corporate funding to help us build the structures necessary to become self-sufficient, and while we are grateful for their support, neither we nor they are interested in creating a situation where the AMLA is forever financially dependent on corporate funding sources. In the meantime, our funding process will be entirely transparent and all funders are listed on our website.

To ensure that no single funder has undue influence now, we have capped annual contributions from each corporate source at $50,000 and we are committed to diversifying our funding sources. Thus far, in addition to funds from AOL Time Warner and other businesses, we have received support from government agencies, foundations, private individuals, and educational institutions and the list is growing.

In short, no single institution is so essential to the survival of the AMLA that we would exempt it from examination and we have created the necessary structures to ensure that this is the case. Our bylaws are designed to protect the ability of the board to represent the members who elect it.

The context for the AMLA's decision to accept corporate funds is our mission to focus on media literacy education. Our approach to education is based on the following assumptions:

• Quality media literacy education requires complex knowledge about who creates media messages and why, and such analysis is always part of good media literacy practice.
• Education may include, but is not identical to, criticism; being an educator is not the same as being a watchdog or a critic.
• Education works best when we have a wide variety of approaches and practitioners enabling us to reach different kinds of audiences and different kinds of learners.
• Quality evaluation of media literacy education attempts to identify the strengths and weaknesses of all approaches to media literacy education without pre-judging method or content. Most approaches have both strengths and limitations.
• The field of media literacy in the U.S. has been held back by a pattern of practitioners who, in the course of promoting their own philosophies have dismissed alternative approaches as having no value. This had led to a divisive shutting down of dialogue and continuation of this pattern will rob the field of the rich sharing that occurs when diversity is valued.

This last point, in particular, has led the AMLA to conclude that the most productive contribution we can make to the field of media literacy education right now is to convene of a coalition of diverse stakeholders, providing opportunities to build on areas of consensus and creating space for respectful dialogue on areas of disagreement.

By definition, working in coalition means that we will almost certainly find ourselves working with people and groups with whom we agree on some issues and disagree on others. And if we do it well, all coalition members should gain something from participation in the coalition. That includes corporations. So, if by funding the AMLA a corporation gets some good PR, that seems like a fair exchange for helping to enable other educators to do the work they have chosen to do.

Just as the AMLA welcomes media watchdogs and critics as an important part of the coalition, we believe that corporate partners have valuable expertise and resources to offer media literacy educators and, therefore, we welcome them as part of the coalition. Our challenge is to create a structure that facilitates work on shared goals in a context where no single voice dominates and no one feels like their basic integrity is compromised or questioned. We recognize that this is no minor task, but if we can succeed, the result will be a vibrant movement that will help expand media literacy efforts across the United States in unprecedented ways.

Finally, we believe that corporations, especially media corporations, have a social responsibility to support media literacy. If we deny them the opportunity to do so and then criticize them for not doing so, we create a no win situation, both for them and for the potential beneficiaries of their efforts.

[top]

Focus on Education
The word that best defines AMLA's mission is "education." Though we recognize that there are many important issues related to media, such as media reform and government policy, AMLA will avoid stretching itself too thin or duplicating other's work by prioritizing the research, development, and dissemination of sound pedagogical practices for teaching media literacy skills and content in a wide variety of educational settings.

[top]

Discourse
AMLA believes that AMLA members can and should serve as models for conducting discussion in respectful ways. We expect a standard of behavior from all members in which put-downs, hate speech, slander, threats, or attempts to silence opponents are off-limits.

[top]

Recycling
AMLA will print its publications on recycled paper stock, even if doing so increases the cost of those publications.

[top]

Duplication
AMLA will not choose projects or allocate resources without first considering whether or not it would be duplicating the work of its members or of existing organizations. The AMLA will strive to avoid such duplication.

[top]

Conflict of Interest / Disclosure

Given the nature of AMLA's work and the fact that much of the Board is, and will continue to be drawn from leaders in the field of media literacy, pre-existing relations with potential partners are inevitable. Therefore, the AMLA Board adopts the following policy:

A CONFLICT OF INTEREST POTENTIALLY EXISTS WHEN:

a. a Board Member is in a position to vote on or influence an AMLA decision on any proposed transaction, partnership, project, policy, or business arrangement with an entity with which that Board Member has an interest, either in terms of direct financial or professional gain, or with which a Board Member has a pre-existing formal relationship, including but not limited to employment or service on that entity's board.

"Direct financial or professional gain" is defined as specific personal benefit, not as the indirect benefit that anyone who works in the field might gain from a particular partnership, initiative, policy, or project.

b. an opportunity within the scope of activities of the AMLA could be exploited by the Board Member, a member of the Board Member's family, or a person to whom a Board Member owes special allegiance (e.g., an employer) for direct financial or professional gain.

TO PREVENT CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS INTERFERING WITH AMLA'S DECISION MAKING PROCESS SUCH THAT IT IS NO LONGER REPRESENTATIVE OF OR IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MEMBERSHIP, OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH AMLA'S MISSION AND POLICIES:

a. All Board members are required, during the course of regular board meetings, to reveal any relationship which might pose a conflict of interest in terms of the AMLA's positions, practices, policies, or decisions. If the Board, after full review, determines that a conflict of interest exists which interferes with the Board's ability to function in the best interest of the membership and/or in adherence with AMLA's mission and policies, by majority vote the Board may:

1. ask the Member with the conflict of interest to recuse themselves from related discussions or votes;

2. ask the Member to sever ties with the entity in question;

3. ask the Member to provide a public, written explanation of their circumstances;

4. choose not to deal with the entity in question; and/or

5. take other measures which the Board deems appropriate.

Failure to disclose a potential conflict of interest may provide grounds for removal from office.

b. Because AMLA Board Members ultimately represent the membership of AMLA, and because members need certain information to make well-informed choices, candidates for AMLA Board positions will be encouraged to disclose any potential or actual conflicts of interest, including listing employers or other significant sources of income or professional affiliations which could have direct bearing on their stance on AMLA policy, programs, or practice.

Background:

The Board also considered the option of requiring detailed financial disclosure and has opted not to require such disclosure because:

a) it is invasive, especially in an era when technology has the potential to erode privacy in ever-expanding ways.

b) it is unnecessary and would go against common practice. Traditionally, conflict of interest policies exist to avoid nepotism, bribery, or payoff schemes. Detailed disclosure of affiliations, especially with respect to financial relationships, are usually reported only to Corporation officers and are otherwise kept confidential. Disclosure that remained confidential would in no way serve members' need for information. Furthermore, the officers have no practical way of protecting such information.

c) it is far more important for Board members to focus on articulating their positions on issues, than it is to disclose every institution or person with whom they work or have worked. Given the fact that a relationship with an entity does not automatically imply that one is an advocate for that entity nor that one endorses all the policies and practices of that entity, to focus on or judge according to disclosure rather than by one's work or declared positions, is tantamount to "guilt by association". Such practice is destructive to democracy and inappropriate for an organization committed to critical inquiry.

d) the members' power to vote for individuals who they trust to represent their perspectives and competently conduct the business of the organization (or to vote out those who have not earned that trust), is a substantial and adequate safeguard against abuse.

[top]

Funding

Funding Policy Guidelines

1. The AMLA believes that media literacy education is strengthened by the involvement of a broad coalition of people and groups. It, therefore, actively seeks to diversify its funding sources and encourages a wide spectrum of organizations, agencies, foundation, corporations, and individuals to support media literacy education.

2. The AMLA does not accept funds from corporations, foundations, organizations or agencies whose work or purpose is counter to AMLA's stated mission, purpose or goals. Any Board member concerned that a contribution may be in violation of this policy may bring it forward for board discussion. Acceptance of funding over $10,000 per year from any single source requires approval by the AMLA Board in the form of a 2/3 majority vote.

3. Funding from any single corporate source is limited to 30% of the AMLA's total budget. There is no cap of funds from other sources.

4. No funder will determine AMLA policy or programs. That responsibility is reserved exclusively for the AMLA Board or its appointed representatives.

5. The AMLA accepts underwriting for web materials and publications. Underwriting, in the form of sponsorship messages, may feature corporate names, logos, and products, but may not include comparisons with other corporations or products. The AMLA will encourage underwriters to include messages of support for media literacy education as part of their copy.

6. The AMLA will not sell its membership or conference registrant list. The AMLA will share such lists only with its members.

7. The AMLA will publish the names of all funders annually. Posting on the AMLA website will be considered the equivalent of "publishing."

8. Acceptance of funding by the AMLA does not constitute and endorsement by the AMLA of any agency, program, institution, company, or product.

9) In all of its fundraising activities, the AMLA will abide by the 1991 Statement of Ethical Principles of the National Society for Fund Raising Executives (NSFRE).

[top]

Debate

AMLA is based on the principle that disagreements are essential to a vibrant field; we not only welcome debate, we encourage it.

[top]