All motions concerned the role of new editor of the Journalist, Christine Buckley, and the state of the Journalist magazine.

Richard Simcox, from the Press and PR branch, said: “We’re really lagging behind in terms of how we run things. We could, and probably should be, following the students’ examples.”

All motions were passed of which motion 133 (covering motion 134) was unopposed.

Motion 133 – Increasing the role of the Journalist editor

Motion 133 (covering Motion 134), proposed by Press and PR branch, discussed the issues of convergence and the role of the editor of the Journalist (the NUJ Journal). It passed unanimously.

Under current NUJ guidelines the editor only has power to edit articles in the journal and those online which have been taken directly from the journal.

In the motion the ADM instructed the National Executive Council (NEC) to:

• Change the NUJ rules to increase the editor’s role – via a motion at next years’ ADM – to expand his/her responsibilities to editing all Journalistic news pieces on the website
• This will mean that the editor will have additional control over “union and other website pages” involving content taken from, or associated with, the union’s journal
• He/she will not have control over the whole site

In order to make the Journalist more prominent among members.

Leeds branch proposed an amendment to the motion arguing that a clause confirming the role of the editor as an “independent elected editor” – and giving them responsibility for all NUJ website content – would clarify the motion.

Press and PR branch asked conference to reject the amendment made by Leeds branch as gives the editor too much power. The amendment was rejected by a massive majority.

Motion 135 – Concerns over the frequency of the Journalist and lack of co-operation between the journal and the online content

Motion 135 (covering motion 136 to 140) – proposed by North Wales Coast, Manchester, Birmingham and Coventry branches – concerned worries that the ADM has with the communications strategy imposed by the NEC and the cutting of regular Journalist issues.

The motion outlined that the Journalist has been cut to six issues a year and that communications between all sectors of the Union are being damaged by cut-backs and incoherent publishing of online material – which is often not published in concert with the news in the Journalist.

The motion instructs the NEC to:

• Ensure that the website includes a daily link to the Journalist is displayed so users are aware of the journal
• To integrate the editor of the Journalist into the Union’s Campaigns and Communications department to ensure unity

Leeds branch proposed an amendment to the motion saying there should be a further section on the NUJ website specifically for unrelated Journalist matters. This was proposed to prevent a converging mess on the internet.

Peter Lazenby, from Leeds branch, urged that the amendment be passed. He said: “In the current state the Journalist – which is our trade press – is inadequate. We have to sort out the online section with the journal and get members involved. First that means highlighting the independence of the Journalist.”

The amendment was rejected by an overwhelming majority and the motion was passed.