GWA vs. GWL

**J* B* <j*@usol.com>**

The discussion in the past weeks has been fascinating.  Having joined  
GWA in 1980 I have been able to see the group transform itself a  
number of times.  When I joined it was a social club.  In the 80’s  
and 90’s it worked to become more of an organization for  
professionals in garden communications.  I have seldom gone to an  
annual meeting without coming home with at least one job.

I think one of the problems of GWA is its growing size.  Back in the  
80’s, with half the numbers of members, I knew most folks coming to  
an annual meeting.  Now I know very few.  One of the reasons is that  
so many are not direct communicators, a distinction I have always  
made in my own head (rightly or wrongly in terms of PC).  For me  
“direct communicators” are the members who are in direct contact on a  
regular basis with gardeners.  That includes the columnists, the  
speakers, the radio jocks, and those few lucky enough to get on  
television.  People who write books and magazine articles are in  
contact with gardeners, but not quite the same way as the “direct”  
group which usually makes some contact every week.  I suppose I  
should include garden bloggers, but I don’t know how many of the 100  
plus garden bloggers are members of GWA.  The “others” were the  
photographers, pr folks, reps of lawn and garden companies,  
association staff, and the like; all important to me and my career  
but just in a different group in terms of how I make my living.  I  
estimate that the “direct communicators” number around 600 or 700 of  
the total membership.  Jeff Lowenfels remembers back in history when  
we calculated that the “direct communicators” reached 15 million  
people a week.  The number may be 25 million now.

Please, hold back the hew(sp?) and cry of elitism.  That is not what  
I’m trying to point out.  My point I think is that there are groups  
within GWA with very different professional needs when they attend  
any GWA meeting. I know the board has struggled with that reality  
many times.   I know that the folks publishing the newsletter  
struggle with that every issue.

I don’t think of GWL as having “groups”.  I think of GWL as a bunch  
of professionals interested in gardening and gardening communications  
in whatever form.  Because it is a daily process, we can skip around  
with topic threads, few of which are of interest to every GWL  
participant.  But when a topic hits us, we can jump in and usually  
there are others with the same interest, for or against.  It is a  
stimulating process.

A person writing thriller books can relate to other people writing  
thriller books.  The group identity is clean.  In garden  
communications, the identity is blurry.  It is hard to draw any  
line.  I think that is why we all have some gripes.  No organization  
could meet all of our needs.

  Jeff Ball
jeffball@usol.com
810-724-8581
Check out my daily blog at www.gardeneryardener.blogspot.com
Check out my extensive web site at www.yardener.com

_______________________________________________
gardenwriters mailing list
gardenwriters@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/gardenwriters

GWL has searchable archives at:
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters

Send photos for GWL to gwlphotos@hort.net to be posted
at: http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos

Post gardening questions/threads to
&quot;Gardenwriters on Gardening&quot; &lt;gwl-g@lists.ibiblio.org&gt;

For GWL website and Wiki, go to
http://www.ibiblio.org/gardenwriters