Late to the party, the ANF recently established a private Facebook group for members. They allow posts from newsagents on the group unmoderated. They do not advise suppliers who are bagged out, they do not offer a right of reply.
This is bad form from an industry association as there appears to be no verification as to the honesty of claims critical of a supplier. However, the ANF has a track record for a lack of due diligence so their disengagement on the accuracy of supplier claims on the forums should not surprise.
The ANF appears to be more concerned about the secrecy of the forum. I say this based on this post recently by ANF CEO Alf Maccioni:
We’re thrilled at the way members are all assisting and supporting each other within this private members group—this groups exists as a safe and protected means for our members to consult each other and work together to grow your businesses. The majority of interactions are positive and beneficial to all members, we have however been made aware of at least 2 occasions where confidential information shared within this group has been passed on to outsiders. As this is a private group, please respect each other and treat everything you read within this group as confidential information. Continual breaches of trust will only result in lower levels of interaction and support from your peers. Meanwhile if we do discover who has passed on information in regards to any post from this page we will delete that user.
Alf is someone who, in my opinion, does not like consultation, debate or cooperation. He prefers to write a letter and say you are wrong on a topic but not engage in any discussion through which he might discover he is wrong.
This was evident through MPA magazine supply trial discussion. I challenged Alf to discuss the issues publicly. He ignored the multiple requests – even though the result would have been more informed members. It was as if he was scared that he might be found to be wrong.
To me, the approach of the ANF in relation to this page that allows ignorant and even false claims to be published is of itself a breach of trust.
I think the ANF obsession with secrecy is misplaced. I think it does not serve newsagents not newsagency suppliers with this obsession with secrecy.
I think it’s a fair call , if people don’t want to be part of the group then why do they feel the need to see what is going on all the time on their Facebook page .
Very rarley have I ever seen any suppliers being bagged on that Facebook page , its more or less just general chat
Shaun I have been provided a couple of examples. One in particular contained false information that the ANF permitted to be published. A professional association would have sought to provide fairness and balance. Alf’s message implies they do not care about that. That’s his right I guess.
It is very illogical that they who claim to be the “PEAK” body of the newsagency channel want to be a secret society that denigrates then disassociates themselves non ANF members.
Those who are non members are potential new members, if ever the ANF decide to work for newsagents who pay membership fees, and not their “industry partners”.
No secret though that members have dropped off like dead flies hit by mortein!
it is generally just an exchange of information and some times we are P….d off with for instance G&Gs time to answer the phone and time to respond to emails or where do I find this or that. No big deal. At least we can set the agenda where as this blog is your agenda.
Carol, through comments here anyone can write about anything and they do and I welcome that. Many topics I write about on the suggestion of others.
The big difference between this blog and the ANF page is this blog is public. This equals transparency and accountability.
Why not join the Facebook page if you want to read it or have concerns ?
My experience is the anf takes down what they don’t like. I expect one day they will take me out of the group. At least here while I rarely agree I can say what I think.