I laughed out loud, sardonically, when I received an email from PRSA asking me to take a survey. They also encouraged me to come back to the organization with a membership discount incentive.
At first I was going to ignore it. But I looked at the survey. True to form for this flailing organization, they asked the respondent to sign a statement that they would not share the contents or design of the survey.
So, transparency is still not a thing for a public relations organization that sells accreditation and promotes an ethics code that touts transparency as a professional value.
Let me be transparent. After decades of membership in this organization and service from the local to national levels, there is nothing that draws me back. The organization is professionally irrelevant, personally insulting, and ethically suspect.
They are professionally irrelevant because they offer programming that is fundamental. I have years of experience, a PhD, and am members of other organizations which feature high-level discussions led by veteran CCOs on a range of current topics from a management perspective. Meanwhile, PRSA’s very expensive annual conference features keynoters who are celebrities, not experienced public relations professionals.
They also sell accreditation in public relations (APR), which a member pays for to get study materials and take the exam, and then pays to maintain it every three years. It’s a nice revenue stream for the organization. But they do nothing to promote APR externally to hiring managers, CEOs and others who may favor a candidate with APR if they know what it is. I chaired the national committee on APR for several years and mentioned this to leadership and was rebuffed. My own research with two co-authors shows a tepid enthusiasm among members for accreditation, and those who do pursue APR say it is mostly for intrinsic value but there is little recognition from employers.
I also can share that PRSA is personally insulting. I ran twice for the national board and was told I was a “PR purist” and that I violated the diversity policy because I expressed publicly my biblical worldview on social issues. I blogged about this previously and I would point out again that their rejection of me for my faith is a violation of their own diversity policy, ethics code, civility statement and quite possibly the law. Many other veteran professionals—those with APR and membership in the College of Fellows—have expressed their own dismay at such toxic leadership and shared their own decision to leave the organization.
And this leads to the problem that PRSA leadership is ethically suspect. That’s actually an understatement. Mary Beth West, who challenged leadership and was met with gaslighting and multi-year undeserved defamation in response, has been recently showing the receipts via her “A Better PRSA” Facebook page on the attitudes of national leadership. Through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, she has legally obtained disturbing PRSA leadership email exchanges that show disparaging remarks about members (even some that sound excessively threatening and often are expletive-laden), clear discrimination toward members of faith (including faith-based universities seeking certifications or accreditations that PRSA helps control), an expressed disinterest in a Black woman for leadership, admissions of their own poor processes, favoritism for their own inner circles, and concern that people “will walk away” if they experience poor process and leadership. West has previously shared information that shows the organization has not been forthcoming with financial and membership numbers that would keep members from making fully informed decision about joining or renewing, another concept from its own ethics code.
Again, both West and I have heard from many, including veteran and accredited professionals, who have share our concern and have left or are considering leaving the organization. Unfortunately they don’t all speak publicly about this, somewhat because of intimidation by leadership and witnessing what happened to West.
It saddens me that I have great respect and admiration for many PR professionals in my local chapter, including a large number of former students. I benefitted from PRSA when I was a younger professional. But I speak up because I am concerned that many at the local level don’t all realize the full truth of the toxic mess at the national level.
So I don’t look at potential new programming or a minor financial discount as compelling and a reason for me to jump back on a sinking ship that would rather steer away than fix the holes. The holes include a lack of service to current members at the professional and student level. I see a declining membership and financial position (I’ve been told a $1.7 million deficit and 25% headquarters staff cuts were “acknowledged” in a memo to a limited few earlier this year). I see poor management and insidious bias. I see not only no reason to return, but relief that I left and am not wasting my time serving an organization that disrespects me.
Every once in a while you see an ad or get some mail that warns you of identity theft and offers some protection against it. This form of identity theft involves some nefarious individual gaining access to one of more important numbers that identify you in the marketplace—drivers license, social security number, address, phone number, email, bank account, credit card and more.
This is disconcerting, as it should be. If some person you don’t know has access to your personal information and is posing as you for their financial gain—and your loss or even ruin—then you feel significantly violated and angry.
This is why there becomes a need to protect yourself. We are warned against “phishing” and other scams intent on getting you to unwittingly give away your financial and legal identity.
But the same is true of another form of identity—social or spiritual identity. Sadly, and oddly, many people are falling victim to scams in this arena as well and willingly relinquishing their true identity to falseness.
One of these false identities is perpetuated by the scam that the whole world falls into a dichotomy of “oppressor and victim.” Deceiving people into thinking they are a victim robs people of their identity as someone who is both capable and responsible. I wrote about the problems of this false-dichotomy and the spurious arguments associated with a one-sided view of DEI—diversity, equity, and inclusion—in a previous post.
I would also recommend the episode of Matt Walsh’s ‘Real History” series about civil rights, which logically and empirically demonstrates that minority populations in our nation’s inner cities were significantly better off before policies followed the flawed notion of victim identity. Another good resource is the Woodson Center, named for the late civil rights pioneer Robert Woodson, which stesses common sense solutions to poverty based on ability and responsibility vs victim mentality.
A protection against this kind of identity theft is to see yourself as an individual with your own merit, and do not allow someone who does not know you to assign you to a broadly defined and irrelevant group. An individual is unique and not merely a member of a category.
Another devious form of identity theft is that of sexual identity. In spite of theological and biological clarity, there is an organized effort to deceive people into thinking they are not the gender that the are. Much of this attempt to steal identity is often behind the backs of their parents.
What’s most puzzling in all of this is the fact that some who are not victims of this identity theft feel compelled to “affirm” the change in identity. To gain a self-satisfaction of being caring, they offer faux compassion to affirm that someone is oppressed or that their gender does not actually match reality, regardless of their chromosomes or the fact that God created humans with two genders, knowing each person while they are in the womb. It makes no more sense than “affirming” the criminal who has stolen someone’s financial identity. What’s most sad about this form of identity theft is that people would rather be randomly popular on social media than intimately loved by God,.
A final form of identity theft happens to people like me who dare to speak of such cultural issues and raise a red flag. Our identity theft culture has bred cancel culture and gaslighting as well. I will be—and have been—framed as a white, evangelical, straight male (all true) with some sort of phobia and full of hate (not true). I actually am rational and speak out in love. People should know who they really are, as designed by God. Knowing who you are in the eyes of God is positive, true and unchanging. There is a good book on this topic: “Identity Theft: Reclaiming the Truth of Who We Are in Christ” that gives hope and addresses other forms of false identity.
There is a dichotomy when it comes to identity. It is not oppressor-victim. It is oppressor-redeemer. Satan oppresses and possesses people to think what is a lie—that they are a victim, that they are the wrong gender. But God, who created all, is truth. People are loved, have potential, and their identity is in relationship to God, not other people or human culture. As Paul reminded residents of Galatia in his letter to them: “for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith” (Galatians 3:26).
Anyone today can also see themselves in the light of the sacrifice of Jesus and be a son or daughter of God. That’s an identity that can’t be stolen, and lasts for an eternity.
With classes starting next week at the university where I teach, I thought I would re-post this article from several years ago.
In recent years the value of college has been increasingly a subject of debate. There are books that call it an outright scam, and others point to college as a necessity for a successful career and stable lifestyle. One of the better recent articles with an objective outline of pros and cons of college was in Forbes.
For the Christian, concerns about college are not just about cost and career preparation. Parents and students wonder about the wisdom of paying to have their faith values denigrated and secular values pushed in the name of education.
I can relate to these concerns. As a Christian college professor on a secular campus, I have felt everything from slight insult (micro aggressions) to broad attack for expressing my personal faith. These happened on my campus and in society at large.
But as a college professor I would say the question is not only whether or not to go to college. It may not be for everyone, and as the Forbes article outlines, there are other alternatives to college. For those who are Christian and decide to go to college, the question becomes how to navigate the experience and maintain your faith.
I recently spoke to a group of parents and students about this topic. I share the basics here.
The College Landscape
Before navigating, it’s important to understand the landscape of college. In doing so, you can identify the specific areas where challenges to faith may arise. These challenges can be in or outside the classroom, from faculty, staff or peer students.
Most four-year colleges require a form of general education. These are groups of courses grouped into categories that could be art, science, history, world cultures and so on. The point is to give every student a broad education in a variety of subjects. Then students select a major and possibly a minor, which are a set of courses focused on a subject or career, such as nursing, communication, business, engineering and others.
Outside of class there is what is commonly called student life. There are a number of student organizations that range from professional in focus, like an accounting association, to a hobby or personal interest, such as the backpacking club. There are hundreds of these, and they are a great way to provide students productive and fun activities and a way to meet like-minded students outside the classroom. (See my list of Christian student organizations at the end of this post).
After class and formal extra-curricular activities there is just the informal college experience. This means friends chosen to “hang out” with as well as roommates in campus housing or an off-campus apartment.
In all of the above, a Christian student could be confronted with assertions and behaviors by professors, college staff, or peer students that is in direct opposition to what they believe and how they would choose to act in accordance with the Bible. But, if a young person goes into the trades and does not attend college, they will also face the same contrary beliefs from bosses, customers, co-workers and others.
So, some of the fears we have about college are unavoidable in the culture at large. And a college degree still offers many benefits for those who attend. What college students–and their parents–need is a compass to navigate college. A typical compass or weathervane has four letters indicating the four directions: north, south, east and west. I have come up with a way for Christians to navigate college that has four Ws: worldview, wonder, weather, witness.
Worldview
You can’t navigate without a map or a course setting. You need to know where you’ve come from and where you want to go, and where the obstacles and dangers are. For the Christian, this is called a biblical worldview. It’s important for students to have this embedded so they can recognize views contrary to the gospel and be able to stay the course.
It is especially important to know what you believe, and how it is rooted in the Bible, because that is extremely rare in our culture. Arizona Christian University’s American Worldview Inventory 2023 shows an alarming drift from basic Bible truths in terms of what people believe: 7 cornerstones of Biblical worldview that a Christian should believe and the percent who actually say they do. Be prepared to be a minority in college. But that’s ok–you would rather have the truth of God than the assertions of people.
Believing God is perfect and just creator and eternal ruler of the world (50%)
Realizing that all humans are not basically good; everyone, including you, is a sinner (27%)
Knowing Jesus Christ is the only means to salvation, through our confession of sin and reliance on His forgiveness (35%)
Believing the Bible to be the true, relevant, and reliable words of God that serve as a moral guide (46%)
Accepting the existence of absolute moral truth (25%)
Acknowledging your purpose in life: knowing, loving and serving God with all your heart, soul, strength and mind (36%)
Understanding genuine success in life: consistent obedience to God (23%)
Wonder
In spite of the fact that college will challenge personal Christian views, students should still see college as a learning opportunity. It is valuable to learn what others think, what those alternative views are. It should not be a shock or cause fear to know that not everyone believes the Bible as it is written, especially when the Bible is full of evidence of that.
College, and life, is about understanding if not always adopting non-Christian views. As I noted earlier, everyone will encounter this in the workplace, in the news, in entertainment, from neighbors and everywhere. In other words, wonder what others think and why they do.
In this way college can be seen as a training for how to navigate culture as a Christian. Christians should not be alarmed at the culture, but prepare to be in the world but not of the world.
And, most of the topics of study in college will be non-confrontational. They will focus on business, engineering, art, communication, or whatever a student has chosen to study to prepare for a career and life.
Weather
In addition to navigating with clear direction, a Christian in college needs to be able to weather storms. I spend a lot of time outdoors and I like the idea that there is no bad weather, just bad gear. So have the right gear!
For a Christian that means staying in touch with parents and a church–either a home church or one near campus. Read the Bible daily, and even memorize scripture that bolsters faith and speaks to a present situation. Pray often, not just at meals and bedtime. Pray specifically for current struggles and opportunities, and for other people.
Another key piece of gear to weather attacks on faith are to choose friends wisely. If you can choose roommates who are also believers that is an asset. Choosing which students to spend time with also matters. A really strong protection for your faith is to join a Christian student organization (again see the list below).
Just be ready. The Bible warns us we will be attacked for our faith. Don’t be surprised, afraid, or think you need to change to “blend in.” As Paul writes, “do not conform to this world” (Romans 12:2), and “be patient in tribulation” (Romans 12:12).
Witness
Finally, consider that being in college is not a threat, it’s an opportunity. Don’t be shy to express your Christian perspective in college environment that claims it welcomes and explores all ideas.
Here are some thoughts about how to be a witness:
Don’t be influenced; BE the influence. Don’t feel outnumbered into silence. You know the truth of God and that is powerful. Share it humbly when you have occasion.
Don’t argue or try to persuade. Share what God has done in your life, that is what it means to “witness.” No one can contradict your experience. Also, give the basis for your statements, explain that your values are based on the Bible and not popular culture.
Acknowledge that multiple views exist, but also in that spirit insist on respect for yours.
Finally, pray. No one can change someone’s heart and persuade them to believe in Jesus. Leave that to the Holy Spirit.
Earlier this week, I spoke to the summer interns at the Mackinac Center. My topic was public relations at the time of the American revolution. This topic coincides with the fact that this decade is the 100th anniversary of public relations being called such as a full-time profession. But public relations scholars have long pointed out that forms of public relations were practiced in all of human history. In my remarks, using material from the PR Museum, I showed how this was so at the time of the American revolution when people throughout 13 colonies needed to be convinced that it was necessary and appropriate to declare independence from Britain. Of course, this topic was also timely given the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence is being celebrated this week.
Our yard is festooned proudly with patriotic ornaments.
My subject was to be an entire special topics class this fall semester at the university where I am a professor. Unfortunately, there were not enough students enrolled by a certain scheduling deadline and the class had to be cut. I don’t know if it was added too late and students had their schedules set, or if there is disinterest in history among college students Maybe some of both. The ones who had signed up had been eager to take the class and were disappointed.
The interns at the Mackinac Center, none of whom are even public relations students, showed keen interest in the subject and asked good questions. That was encouraging and fun.
I am naturally passionate about public relations and its history. That would be expected from someone who has been a professor of public relations and published articles and chapters on its history among my other research subjects.
But I am also interested in American history and keenly appreciative of the uniqueness of our founding documents and the uniqueness of our form of governance. What we celebrate this week is 250 years of shedding oppressive control, forming our own government, and gaining national and personal liberty unlike any that has been achieved in the world with the possible exception of ancient Greece.
Therefore, education and celebration on this subject has always been important. But it is more so now. That is because many today, in the grip of the re-emergence of a flawed Marxist ideology, actually deplore America and are “offended” by seeing reverence for the flag and celebration of national history. They see America as an oppressor, not a liberator.
This is nonsense when as an abstract, socially constructed idea it is measured against experience and observation.
Individual rights, liberty, and responsibility are the foundation of the US, and the ingredients for a system that has enabled more opportunity and prosperity than any nation in history. Yes there are flaws and imperfections, but that can be addressed by policy within our governing framework, not throwing out the system. Some today want the government to provide for them in the form of free health care, busses, education even universal income as opposed to embracing self-reliance and getting government out of their lives. Recently elected politicians in New York City and other local governments across the land are promising such things, and many are falling for it. This form of government as nanny, socialism, central planning, Maxism, call it what you will has never worked, and in fact is abusive. Read Road to Serfdom, written 80 years ago but applicable today.
The issue is, nothing is free. Those who succumb to accepting so-called free things from government lose their personal liberty. I once asked a student who thought free things from government was a good thing if he would live with his parents after graduation for the remainder of their lives. He said of course not. I said what if they gave you free rent, free food, free use of a car? He said no. I asked why. He wanted his independence. Exactly.
I once saw two families at the beach. Each had a toddler. It came time for both families to leave and they started gathering their things and trudging across the sand. The toddler in one family said “I carry!” He boldly dragged a beach chair to the family car. The other family’s toddler whined and said “carry me!” His father added the child to his collection of cooler, chairs and bags. The former child knows the joy of self-reliance and independence. The other is a malcontent destined for a life of dependence, dissatisfaction and marching at rallies with signs protesting the fact that he is “oppressed.”
As former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said of socialism: “it works until they run out of other people’s money.” Or eminent economics professor and author Thomas Sowell’s apt description of socialism: “favoring what sounds good over what actually works.”
America, at 250 is an empirical lesson in what works. Our republic as a system is not perfect, but it was precisely designed to manage those imperfections. It remains the best, most exceptional effort at self-governance that the world has known.
Bernie Sanders, a long-time U.S. Senator who champions socialism and decries millionaires and billionaires, has never held a job outside of government. Nevertheless, he flies first class and has three homes. When questioned about doing this as a public servant and having only a taxpayer-funded salary, he defends himself by saying he wrote books that sold well. So, taking personal initiative and being rewarded financially is ok for him, but not others. And all he generated was words, much as I love books. Meanwhile, those millionaires and billionaires he hates created millions of jobs, products and services people need, and numerous other positive outcomes.
The Sanders story is just one. Look at the long history of socialism and see how its leaders become enriched and the people for whom they claim to serve suffer in terms of limited liberty, choice, opportunity and personal advancement.
The very things those who hate America are proposing are the very reason so many people are flooding our borders to get to America. They are not coming here to be “oppressed” by our federal republic—they are fleeing the oppression in the socialist states in which they live. While some Americans live in other countries as expats, and do so for the weather, family relationships, or other nominal reasons, there are few Americans who immigrate completely and take up citizenship in other countries for more personal freedom.
But an anti-American sentiment persists. That is because each generation must be taught about the unique and beneficial values of America. But our education institutions are actually teaching our young to hate America, and pushing socialism and communism on students. I know K-12 teachers who personally have stood up against curriculum that does this and they were reprimanded. Universities, often founded to train pastors and citizens with civic pride and professional abilities, now seem bent on conditioning the youth of the nation to turn against it. Read more about how a radicalized left has worked to undermine America in Christopher Rufo’s America’s Cultural Revolution.
We have seen a rise recently of local and state candidates winning elections who are part of the Democratic Socialists of America. They claim to be for workers, but their website also makes clear they are a political activist organization, not a party. And they are less about the economic well-being of American workers than they are about flawed globalist ideologies, such as open borders and intensification of anti-Semitism.
It is interesting to see some people today liken our current president to Adolf Hitler or a NAZI. This may be hyperbole or a literal assessment. Either way, in their emotional ignorance, they forget that the term NAZI is an abbreviation of the German word Nationalsozialist, which translates to National Socialist in English. It specifically refers to a member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP), which was led by Adolf Hitler. The Democratic Socialists of America, with their fiery rhetoric, claims to be for workers, but its candidates’ unabashed hatred of Jews, disdain for individual initiative and propensity for violence seem far more like the NAZIs in 1930s Germany than any other party of movement in America today. Yet the re-programmed youth and others stirred to anger blindly vote for them.
Another unique and brilliant aspect of the founding of the USA is acknowledgement that rights come from God, not government. This was revolutionary and reformative, spoken of by Hobbes, Locke, and others. The government is merely other people, and who are they to presume the granting of rights. We have the rights as our founding documents say to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The anti-Americans among us favor Marx over Locke and seek to eliminate faith from our culture. They devalue life with promotion of assisted suicide and abortion. They want the government to control everything at the expense of our individual liberty and choice. And rather than allow people the freedom of their own pursuits they would propose the government supply what they think will make people happy. Socialism runs its course is arrogant and elitist. The bedrock of America’s founding values is actual respect for individuals.
Another threat to our democracy from socialism is its intended divisiveness. We have on our currency the latin phrase “e pluribus unum,” which means out of many, one. This is a statement that even in our different races, philosophies, religions, and individual differences, we are still united on foundational national—and positive—principles as indicated above. Some today insist that all agree to certain moral and political perspectives based on hatred and anger, or face gaslighting and cancellation.
I can end this essay with some hope as I think about America going forward.
Occurring concurrently with our national 250th birthday is the World Cup on our soil. There have been many articles, such as this one from the BBC, about how these fans from many other countries realize they were lied to (one person interviewed actually said this) about the USA and are ecstatic about their actual experience. They are raving about everything from the splendor of suburban homes, to the vast offerings at supermarkets, to the kindness of average Americans.
Most Americans are still in line with founding and other positive values, and are not on board with what socialists are pushing, according to some research by independent journalist Michael Shellenbarger shared in his Substack called “Public.” He notes: “Abolishing the police drew just 15% support even back in 2020 at the height of the power of Black Lives Matter. Seventy-four percent of Americans approve of the separation of powers, 90% favor co-equal branches, and only 9% want any one branch to hold more power. Eighty-one percent of Americans view free enterprise positively, while only 39% view socialism positively, and that 39% reflects the diluted Scandinavian sense of the word, not expropriating apartment buildings and other forms of housing. Seventy percent support closing the border, and 69% support limiting who can claim asylum.”
Perhaps reading the statistics and polls, more traditional Democrats are trying to save the party—and the nation—from the dangerous leftward tilt of Neo-Marxist communists in socialist clothes. As one example, New York Democrat U.S. Representative Tom Suozzi wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal warning that “Democrats Need to Show Our Love for America.”
Another reason for hope is the 15 or so young people I spoke to earlier this week. I am pleased to see they understand all of this. I encouraged them to speak positively about and advocate for our country as often as they can in their personal and professional lives.
On the occasion of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the world is showing love for America. Some Democrats are standing up to socialists in their party who pose a threat to our unique democracy and national culture. A sample of young college students is showing respect and appreciation for our history. All Americans must maintain that view as well as we celebrate a quarter millennium of history. We need remain very mindful that ours is a country not based on geography or ethnicity but an idea. That idea brought positive change and centuries of benefits. The idea of America is worth celebrating and keeping.
Many people do not give a lot of thought about boards, particularly university boards, until there is a crisis. But they are critical to a well-functioning organization whether situations or routine or challenging.
How people get on university boards is currently at issue in Michigan. A recent article in Bridge about whether Michigan’s governor should appoint board members for all of Michigan’s state universities. This would be similar to most other states. Currently voters in Michigan elect boards members for the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, and Wayne State University. Given some issues at those universities such as sudden departures of presidents, and the facts that voters are not informed enough to select university board members, there is a proposal to have the governor appoint boards.
But appointed boards are not necessarily a guarantee of better boards. Some boards can exercise their role more with arrogance than competence.
This was evident recently when more than 200 faculty, staff and students wrote a letter to the board of the university where I teach. They expressed displeasure with the direction of the university and its current president, who among other things, has never taught a class and does not seem interested in faculty perspective. The board responded by extending the president’s contract three years before it was even up for renewal.
This shows a problem of appointed boards. Candidates for university boards are often brought before the governor from the universities themselves, often with the president’s involvement. This sounds more like perpetuating a cabal than a judicious selection of a board.
In my own research on public relations capacity on corporate boards and nonprofit boards, I grounded the studies on board theory. There are essentially two schools of thought on boards. Resource Dependency Theory says that board members provide resources from outside the organization needed for survival or growth. Meanwhile, Agency Theory says the role of boards is monitoring the executive and acting in the interest of stakeholders, Often organizational boards are a blend of both, providing external resources and knowledge as well as ensuring the executive acts in accordance with stakeholder expectations.
It is clear in the example above from GVSU that the board did not monitor the executive in the interest of the stakeholders. They were more concerned with their personal relationship with the president than their professional responsibility to stakeholders.
My research focused on public relations capacity in board members of both corporations and nonprofit executives. There is, sadly, little evidence of it. Most board members are selected in accordance with Resource Dependency Theory to provide resources other than public relations. This includes an expertise in finance, law, and whatever it is the organization does.
Board members who understand that public relations is not mere publicity but all about mutually beneficial relationships with stakeholders would better serve both the organization and the varied stakeholders it must serve. If board members are appointed or elected, they should have a grasp of their oversight role and that the work not for the president and institution but they oversee it to ensure it serves the taxpayers, faculty, staff, students and other stakeholders.
The focus on relationships is more than a public relations perspective. It is essential to good leadership and management. At my institution, there was a sudden leadership change at multiple top executive positions. I was at a meeting where they introduced themselves and when they started and none had been at the university more than 18 months. I was sitting near faculty like myself who had been at the institution more than 20 or 30 years. But the new executives addressed this by having events where faculty could learn about them. They never attempted to learn about the faculty and how they had contributed to the growth of the university for so long.
Recently the university had an event at which the current and four past presidents spoke and reflected. The oldest and longest-serving president recalled how he would walk around campus and drop in on offices on a regular basis to get to know people better, learn what they were working on, hear their ideas and concerns. I personally remember that. The culture has changed. A board, especially if a member or two is savvy to public relations, could insist that the president and executive team work harder to get to know long-serving faculty and staff and institutional history before trying to impose their new imprint on the university.
What will be important more than how board members are selected is how board members serve. Also, there needs to be a mechanism not just to select board members but to remove those who do not act in the interest of stakeholders.
