A list of MnIndy’s eight awards, with judges’ notes:

First place awards

Best single news story — Independent Web site:

“Convention cash: The biggest loophole in American politics,” Paul Demko

This story stood out in a field crowded with good work because of the enterprising approach taken by the reporters. They didn’t take no for an answer and called the businesses that refused to report their donations, getting great — and contradictory — quotes that added to the outrage factor. A great example of  watchdog journalism.

Best use of multimedia — Independent Web site:

RNC Multimedia, Newsroom

MinnesotaIndependent.com did the best job of using multimedia tools to capture the RNC: Twitter for news of the moment, photos, video and text greater storytelling context and depth. But no one in this category has truly harnessed the potential power of multimedia storytelling.

Best use of video — Independent Web site:

“The F30 Pedal Cloud brings people-powered protest to the RNC,” Paul Schmelzer

Good use of angles, cuts, music and interviews turned what could have been a dull feature into a treat.

Best independent news blog — Independent Web site:

“The Monitor blog,” Newsroom

The Monitor does all the things a good blog should: Showcases the authority of its writers; aggregates the best of the Web; integrates video, photos and Twitter feeds; interacts with readers, and updates throughout the day. I don’t need to go anywhere because you bring it all to me.

Second place awards

Best single news story — Independent Web site:

“Are jihadist groups luring Minnesota Somalis back to fight?,” Abdi Aynte

Best Web site — Independent Web site:

Newsroom Staff (First place went to the Twin Cities Daily Planet.)

Third Place

Best continuing coverage — Independent Web site:

“Nasser Kazeminy/Norm Coleman lawsuits,” Steve Perry

Best single news story — Independent Web site:

“Minneapolis parks’ Red Bull and Pepsi dealings put Coke contract at risk,” Chris Steller

Here’s the full winners list.

UPDATE: MnIndy wins four first place Page One awards, four others

A list of winners and categories:

Newsroom Staff
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16A: Best Web site [Online - News Web Sites]

Paul Demko
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16B: Best single news story [Online - News Web Sites]

Abdi Aynte
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16B: Best single news story [Online - News Web Sites]

Chris Steller
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16B: Best single news story [Online - News Web Sites]

Steve Perry
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16C: Best continuing coverage [Online - News Web Sites]

Paul Schmelzer
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16F: Best use of video [Online - News Web Sites]

Newsroom Staff
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16E: Best use of multimedia [Online - News Web Sites]

Newsroom Staff
Minnesota Independent
Independent Web site    16H: Best independent news blog [Online - News Web Sites]

In 2007, MnIndy (then Minnesota Monitor) became the first online-only news operation in Minnesota history to win a Page One award. At last year’s banquet, the site won three honors, including a first place for best single news story by an independent site. This year, more than 420 entries were received.

Photo by Tom Olmscheid, Session Weekly

Someone at the state Capitol is trying to “stifle public access” to legislative proceedings there, says the Minnesota chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists in a new statement this afternoon. Exactly who, an SPJ board member tells the Minnesota Independent, isn’t known. At issue are rules — old, new and not-yet-made — on which media can get floor access in the House of Representatives and who can record what in House committee rooms.

New restrictions on audio and video recording released Friday were apparently retracted Monday after the mainstream media complained, although it’s not clear in what direction the House leadership will take the issues.

“The House should throw this out and start over. This is not workable. I don’t know where this is coming from,” SPJ board member Art Hughes tells MnIndy. “This is effort to orchestrate coverage at the Capitol.”

Hughes says that as a radio reporter he has frequently found himself educating local officials on the finer points of the state’s open meeting law. “I’ve run into cases many times where people don’t want an otherwise public meeting recorded. Especially people in small towns who don’t understand what they were getting into when they were elected.”

Things ought to be different at the Capitol, Hughes says. “In the case of the state Legislature, these guys are pros. They’re big boys and girls. It’s time for them to understand that people don’t just walk in with pens and pads of paper anymore.”

Media access to the House floor and allowing taping in committee rooms should be of concern to the general public, Hughes said. “It’s about public access, especially with nearly $5 billion in cuts to the state government” coming, he said.

Last week, the journalists’ organization came out in favor of online media access to the House floor. On Monday, the SPJ sent a statement about the proposed new rules in response to an inquiry from WCCO-TV. Here is the group’s latest statement, issued this afternoon:

MINNESOTA SPJ OPPOSES HOUSE ATTEMPT TO STIFLE PUBLIC ACCESS

The Minnesota Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists strongly opposes efforts by the Minnesota House of Representatives to limit how the public is allowed into public policy meetings and discussions. The safety of legislators is a valid concern. But curtailing videotaping and other recording methods of those legislators is clearly not a safety threat as Representative Tony Sertich contends.

Make no mistake: these proposed rules are an attempt to shut down oversight of the public process. SPJ recommends the House discard this very flawed attempt to orchestrate press coverage and start over seeking public input to create a fair, open and equitable means of access.

Should journalists who do their reporting online have the same access at the state Capitol that broadcast and print media enjoy? The issue is especially intriguing people interested in media and government. “It is a beaut,” said Minneapolis media attorney Mark Anfinson.

New media journalists have forced the issue by proposing a rule change that would add “online media” to the types of news outlets that can get credentials to work on the floor of the Minnesota House of Representatives.

Who is a journalist? Where does government allow journalists to go to report the news? Those are questions that came up during the Republican National Convention (RNC) in St. Paul, Anfinson notes, but the online-media question at the Capitol “focuses it more perfectly [with] a single geographical locus:” the House floor.

“Some legislators are really freaked out about liveblogging and live uplinks,” said Jane Kirtley, a professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication. “It’s nothing personal. … [They] want to continue to deal with the media [they] know. I can understand that.”

But those fears shouldn’t guide policy, Kirtley said. “There needs to be some rational basis by which a government entity can decide who’s going to be there.

“If the issue is decorum in the space, then the body should have rules of conduct,” Kirtley says, adding that doesn’t mean rules regarding the content of reporting. What might they be? Hughes says he can envision restrictions on tripods that take up space and could cause disruption as they’re taken down or set up. Kirtley offers the example of a ban on noisily changing video cassettes during proceedings. If it’s not followed, she said, “We can kick you out.”

“We’re looking at it. We don’t have an opinion,” said Chuck Samuelson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota (ACLU-MN). He said the organization might decide on a response to the issue today. Samuelson said he’d received about 20 e-mails on the issue.

“Because the discriminated class are wordsmiths, you get a tremendous amount of smoke,” he said, as with issues involving celebrities, like former Minnesota Viking Carl Eller’s recent run-ins with the law.

The ACLU may step in if the current rule violates the state or federal constitutions. But those don’t contain specific protections or guarantees for journalists. “The First Amendment is there to protect publishers,” Samuelson says. “As a journalist you have no more rights than John Q. Public. …

“If I were to say I’m going to put a rule in [that] I can only allow 20 people on the floor as observers, we’re going to assign these observers according to circulation [or Web hits] … then next year assign credentials depending on circulation range,” Samuelson said. “That ‘s how I would do it: John Q. Public is represented by these [media outlets]. And at the beginning that’s basically what they did,” Samuelson said. “But the media’s blown up.”

Might the fuss put all media access to the House floor at risk? Anfinson, who represents news organizations across the state, thinks so, and Kirtley agrees it’s a risk.

Art Hughes, a radio reporter who like Kirtley serves on the state board of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), disagrees. “That’s not going to happen,” Hughes said. “There’d be a revolution.”

Related:

New Minnesota House form limits what would-be tapers can capture

Who Owns the J-Word? Videoblogger’s Jailing Raises Questions for Journalists