A vote to extend NCEW membership to the 'net.

You've probably noticed that opinion writing--the medium, if not the message--has changed. And NCEW must change, too, if it is to thrive.

At the convention, you will be asked to approve changes in membership requirements. Most significantly, membership would be extended to people who write commentary for magazines or web-based publications.

This is a natural extension of the direction NCEW has been moving in since agreeing in 1965 to accept editorial writers who work for special-interest newspapers, in the early 1980s to admit opinion columnists, and in 1989 to welcome broadcast editorial writers. Given this history, it is logically inconsistent to deny membership to those who write for magazines and online outlets.

Logic aside, it is not in NCEW's interest to limit itself to newspapers and broadcast when opinion writing in magazines and on the Internet, especially, is flourishing. Embracing such writers does three things for NCEW: It gives members an opportunity to learn from those who work for the newer media, it keeps the organization from becoming insular, and it provides needed potential for membership growth.

A legitimate question is whether opening membership to Web-based writers will bring applications from bloggers whose work is not serious and whose opinions may be uninformed. It will not, any more than we are deluged with applications from newspaper letter writers. We don't accept them. To reinforce that position, the proposed constitutional language adds the word "professional" and says opinion writing and editing must be "a regular part" of the applicant's duties.

A second concern may be whether accepting magazine-based opinion writers will require us to admit those who work for special-interest publications or trade journals, thereby changing the nature of the organization. It will not. The existing constitutional prohibition on public relations personnel and writers for trade journals and party organs will be retained, with that exclusion extended to "writers of opinion for nonprofit advocacy organizations."

Members may wonder how much to expect our traditional membership base to change. My answer is not much, not now. I do see this as positioning NCEW for 21st-century developments in opinion writing. Presently there is no organization serving Web-based commentators. Someday there will be, and it should be NCEW.

Now about those technical changes:

* The words "regular part of their duties" were added to clarify intent and guide future membership chairs.

* New wording is proposed to clarify that we will accept as student members those who "demonstrate a serious interest in editorial writing" or write editorials for college papers. The previous language restricted memberships to students enrolled in journalism schools or departments, leaving out students from colleges with neither. Board members agreed this was never the intent.

* A service charge for transferring a membership (when constitutionally permissible) was stricken. To the best of my knowledge, it has never been applied.

The changes proposed grew out of a resolution at the Providence board meeting directing me to put together a committee to recommend a broadening of membership. We considered and rejected several other ideas (such as admitting talk show hosts and cartoonists and developing an affiliate membership for advocacy and think-tank writers). We settled on changes we believed were consistent with the organization's purpose, which is to stimulate "the conscience and the quality of editorials," and its clear focus on the written word. The board approved the recommendations in April.

The recommendations are posted on our website and will be available at the Chicago convention. I suggest looking at them with constitution in hand.

Barbara Mantz Drake, editorial page editor of the Journal Star in Peoria; is the NCEW membership chair. E-mail [e-mail]