KEY POINTS:
Annual general meetings are often uncomfortable for directors and chief executives. But the public flaying they get from their small shareholders is a time-honoured tradition around the world.
Though the roastings seldom result in material changes - the conservative voting habits of big institutions ensure that - they are a functional part of the corporate machine.
They are a safety valve - cathartic for the shareholders and a chance for the board to front up and explain their decisions, or lack of them.
It's not a process boards should shy away from even when they know they are likely to be in the firing line. Curious then that in the last couple of weeks two major companies have attempted to significantly limit media access.
SkyCity yesterday tried - and failed - to limit photographers to just five minutes of access.
That would have allowed time for a nice picture of the chairman's address but no shots of shareholders asking tough questions or directors responding.
Vector meanwhile banned all photographers from its AGM last Friday.
Their excuse was this was standard procedure for the company. But it's not standard for most companies. Or, it hasn't been. Let's hope this this not the start of a trend.
Attempting to ban or control media coverage of a high profile event invariably backfires on the organisations involved.
It's effectively a declaration that there will be something going on that we should be interested in. A red rag to a bull.
Two possible reasons for banning photographers spring to mind.
One is the previously mentioned risk of cantankerous small shareholders or bearded gentlemen in Viking helmets stealing the spotlight.
The other is that the media might choose to run unflattering photos of directors looking ruffled or threatened.
Why directors would rather we ran outdated file shots - typically from the days when hair was booffier and moustaches more socially acceptable - it is hard to say.
The media chooses pictures that tell a story in a dramatic fashion. Sometimes that might even be done to satirical effect.
The nation's politicians have proved less than thick-skinned with their attempts to ban the satirical use of photographs. It would be nice to think that our corporate leaders had more of a sense of humour.
Despite being public companies, firms' annual general meetings aren't actually public meetings and companies have a right to refuse entry to non-shareholders.
But it is shareholders the directors represent. And it is shareholders who will be the most interested in the media coverage.
Not all shareholders can get to a meeting - particularly when they are held in far- flung corners of the country.
To that end Contact Energy may have pulled the shrewdest diversionary move yesterday. At least that's how the New Zealand Shareholders Association sees it.
Scheduling a contentious meeting in Christchurch at the same time as the SkyCity soiree certainly split the attention of the financial community's most dogged activists.
Despite some tough questions being asked, it was by all accounts a pretty civil affair - as you might expect in the genteel environs of the Garden City.
By global standards New Zealand shareholders are all a pretty tame bunch. In Australia heated exchanges between directors and shareholders are more common.
In the US and UK it's not uncommon for fringe environmental and political activists to buy shares just to disrupt meetings.
Thankfully in New Zealand we've been spared that. These meetings are first and foremost for genuine shareholders. They are a big deal for those who have invested hard-earned savings with a company.
That is all the more reason why the media - photographers and all - ought to be there.
* Liam Dann is editor of the Business Herald.
