Ashley Wood, Miss South Carolina 2004, attends the Wharton School. She has not been able to collect her pageant scholarships. (Jessica Kourkounis for The New York Times)By JENNIFER 8. LEE
When Ashley Wood was crowned Miss South Carolina in 2004, she thought her title came not only with a tiara and a shot at Miss America, but also a $20,000 state scholarship and $5,000 national pageant scholarship.
Ms. Wood said Miss America scholarship winners “encounter one obstacle after another.”This fall, Ms. Wood entered the Wharton School, the business-studies arm of the University of Pennsylvania. But she has yet to receive any of that scholarship money, having been locked in a dispute with the Miss South Carolina pageant for more than two years.
“You are talking about an organization that is promoting itself as the largest scholarship provider for women in the world,” Ms. Wood, 26, said of the Miss America Organization. “When contestants try to collect their funds, they encounter one obstacle after another.”
Ms. Wood said she was told that she would not get the $20,000 for winning the Miss South Carolina pageant in part because her two local pageants had not paid her $950 that she had won from them (Ms. Wood said that after she enrolled in classes, one group reneged on payment and the other dodged her when she tried to collect). In turn, because she did not receive the state money, the national pageant sent her a letter in June saying she was ineligible for the $5,000 from it, even though the deadline to use her national scholarship had not passed. “It’s like a game of gotcha,” she said. “What is very clear to me is that the goal is to not give out the scholarships if at all possible.”
Ms. Wood’s is among the most prominent disputes in recent years involving the pageant system, which endures — albeit diminished — since network television dropped the Miss America Pageant in 2004. But there have long been complaints that the 1,200 local and 52 state pageants run under the aegis of the national pageant often do not distribute scholarships to winners. The contestants say their difficulties collecting their money surprise them, given that the Miss America system promotes itself as a scholarship pageant rather than a beauty pageant, unlike its main rival, the Miss USA contest.
Interviews with contestants across the country describe a Miss America system in which local pageant directors do not return telephone calls and e-mail messages for months, local competitions close down before scholarships are distributed, and the fine print in contracts creates hurdles. Local winners across the country have threatened legal action, and some have taken it.
Pageant organizers at each level of the Miss America system say that such problems are the exception and that they occur because contestants miss deadlines or do not dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s to get paid.
In a statement, the Miss America Organization, based in Linwood, N.J., said: “While it is unimaginable that scholarships, which are the heart and soul of Miss America, could or would be wrongly withheld from pageant participants, we are looking into these allegations. We have definitive procedures in place to vet disputes and guarantee state organizations stand behind their scholarship agreements with the Miss America Organization and those to whom scholarships are promised.”
The statement added, “The Miss America Organization is absolutely unaware of any young lady that has ever been denied payment of scholarships after properly following the application process.”
Gail M. Sanders, comptroller of the Miss South Carolina contest, declined to discuss Ms. Wood’s case but said, “To my knowledge there is not a single contestant in the state of South Carolina who has abided by the rules who has not been paid.”
Carrie Davis Cousar, Miss South Carolina 1992, sued the pageant and settled a short time later; the terms were not disclosed. Last year, the South Carolina secretary of state investigated the Miss South Carolina competition and fined it $2,000 in March for not having its financial papers in order.
Pageant organizers and contestants at the local and state levels describe a system plagued by weak oversight and run largely by 100,000 volunteers. The local competitions, franchised by the 52 state pageants, have no legal ties to the national organization, though they feed contestants into the national pageant, which moved to Las Vegas from Atlantic City last year and will be broadcast on the TLC cable channel in January. And the local pageants vary in how well they are administered, contestants and administrators say.
Safiya Songhai, Miss Five Boroughs of New York in 2004, said she struggled to get the $1,000 scholarship she won. “I had been warned by a girl who won before me that I’m not going to see that money,” said Ms. Songhai, who said that in contrast, she had no problem collecting $5,000 as a runner-up to Miss District of Columbia in 2001 and 2003.
She filed and won a case by default in small claims court in Manhattan after the director of the Miss Five Boroughs Scholarship Pageant failed to respond to messages left over five months. When she still had not received her scholarship, she took her story to a local television station. She was paid within two days of the broadcast of her account, she said. The organizer of the now-disbanded pageant did not return calls for comment.
“Basically, if I hadn’t gone after them, I wouldn’t have gotten my money,” Ms. Songhai said. “There is no real checks and balances to make sure the contestants get their money.” She said that competing in Miss Five Boroughs was fun, but added, “They are disorganized and they are bad with money management.”
Saidah Story won a $1,000 scholarship as Miss Inland Empire 2003 in California, but her mother, Renee Wickman, said the pageant director informed her that there would be no scholarship.
“Instead of the scholarship, she was like, ‘You can take these gowns,’ ” Ms. Wickman said. The pageant folded after that year. Bob Arnhym, president of the Miss California Pageant, said the Miss Inland Empire director moved to Canada because her mother had fallen ill, but had notified the state she had given Ms. Story “the full value of the scholarship.”
Despite contractual agreements, the state organizations say they have only limited enforcement of local scholarships.
“Is there something that the state can do? In short, the answer is really no,” said Paul Brown, executive director of Miss New York. “While we require that they maintain scholarship bank accounts while they are in existence, we have no control over what happens to that,” he said. “The only control that we have is over them maintaining a legal franchise.”
In theory, state pageants could take local pageants to court, but “that legal battle is prohibitive financially,” Mr. Brown said. “It’s not worth doing that for a scholarship which is $1,000.”
Still, state-level executives will step in at times. Sherry Rush, the executive director of the Miss Maryland competition, said the organization tried to help Ashley Windle, Miss Chesapeake Bay 2006, and Kristy Chance, Miss Prince George’s County 2004, after they were unable to collect scholarship money from their local pageants. They have yet to be paid, however.
Source: The New York Times
“You are talking about an organization that is promoting itself as the largest scholarship provider for women in the world,” Ms. Wood, 26, said of the Miss America Organization. “When contestants try to collect their funds, they encounter one obstacle after another.”
Ms. Wood said she was told that she would not get the $20,000 for winning the Miss South Carolina pageant in part because her two local pageants had not paid her $950 that she had won from them (Ms. Wood said that after she enrolled in classes, one group reneged on payment and the other dodged her when she tried to collect). In turn, because she did not receive the state money, the national pageant sent her a letter in June saying she was ineligible for the $5,000 from it, even though the deadline to use her national scholarship had not passed. “It’s like a game of gotcha,” she said. “What is very clear to me is that the goal is to not give out the scholarships if at all possible.”
Ms. Wood’s is among the most prominent disputes in recent years involving the pageant system, which endures — albeit diminished — since network television dropped the Miss America Pageant in 2004. But there have long been complaints that the 1,200 local and 52 state pageants run under the aegis of the national pageant often do not distribute scholarships to winners. The contestants say their difficulties collecting their money surprise them, given that the Miss America system promotes itself as a scholarship pageant rather than a beauty pageant, unlike its main rival, the Miss USA contest.
Interviews with contestants across the country describe a Miss America system in which local pageant directors do not return telephone calls and e-mail messages for months, local competitions close down before scholarships are distributed, and the fine print in contracts creates hurdles. Local winners across the country have threatened legal action, and some have taken it.
Pageant organizers at each level of the Miss America system say that such problems are the exception and that they occur because contestants miss deadlines or do not dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s to get paid.
In a statement, the Miss America Organization, based in Linwood, N.J., said: “While it is unimaginable that scholarships, which are the heart and soul of Miss America, could or would be wrongly withheld from pageant participants, we are looking into these allegations. We have definitive procedures in place to vet disputes and guarantee state organizations stand behind their scholarship agreements with the Miss America Organization and those to whom scholarships are promised.”
The statement added, “The Miss America Organization is absolutely unaware of any young lady that has ever been denied payment of scholarships after properly following the application process.”
Gail M. Sanders, comptroller of the Miss South Carolina contest, declined to discuss Ms. Wood’s case but said, “To my knowledge there is not a single contestant in the state of South Carolina who has abided by the rules who has not been paid.”
Carrie Davis Cousar, Miss South Carolina 1992, sued the pageant and settled a short time later; the terms were not disclosed. Last year, the South Carolina secretary of state investigated the Miss South Carolina competition and fined it $2,000 in March for not having its financial papers in order.
Pageant organizers and contestants at the local and state levels describe a system plagued by weak oversight and run largely by 100,000 volunteers. The local competitions, franchised by the 52 state pageants, have no legal ties to the national organization, though they feed contestants into the national pageant, which moved to Las Vegas from Atlantic City last year and will be broadcast on the TLC cable channel in January. And the local pageants vary in how well they are administered, contestants and administrators say.
Safiya Songhai, Miss Five Boroughs of New York in 2004, said she struggled to get the $1,000 scholarship she won. “I had been warned by a girl who won before me that I’m not going to see that money,” said Ms. Songhai, who said that in contrast, she had no problem collecting $5,000 as a runner-up to Miss District of Columbia in 2001 and 2003.
She filed and won a case by default in small claims court in Manhattan after the director of the Miss Five Boroughs Scholarship Pageant failed to respond to messages left over five months. When she still had not received her scholarship, she took her story to a local television station. She was paid within two days of the broadcast of her account, she said. The organizer of the now-disbanded pageant did not return calls for comment.
“Basically, if I hadn’t gone after them, I wouldn’t have gotten my money,” Ms. Songhai said. “There is no real checks and balances to make sure the contestants get their money.” She said that competing in Miss Five Boroughs was fun, but added, “They are disorganized and they are bad with money management.”
Saidah Story won a $1,000 scholarship as Miss Inland Empire 2003 in California, but her mother, Renee Wickman, said the pageant director informed her that there would be no scholarship.
“Instead of the scholarship, she was like, ‘You can take these gowns,’ ” Ms. Wickman said. The pageant folded after that year. Bob Arnhym, president of the Miss California Pageant, said the Miss Inland Empire director moved to Canada because her mother had fallen ill, but had notified the state she had given Ms. Story “the full value of the scholarship.”
Despite contractual agreements, the state organizations say they have only limited enforcement of local scholarships.
“Is there something that the state can do? In short, the answer is really no,” said Paul Brown, executive director of Miss New York. “While we require that they maintain scholarship bank accounts while they are in existence, we have no control over what happens to that,” he said. “The only control that we have is over them maintaining a legal franchise.”
In theory, state pageants could take local pageants to court, but “that legal battle is prohibitive financially,” Mr. Brown said. “It’s not worth doing that for a scholarship which is $1,000.”
Still, state-level executives will step in at times. Sherry Rush, the executive director of the Miss Maryland competition, said the organization tried to help Ashley Windle, Miss Chesapeake Bay 2006, and Kristy Chance, Miss Prince George’s County 2004, after they were unable to collect scholarship money from their local pageants. They have yet to be paid, however.
Source: The New York Times
1 comment:
I would like to exchange links with your site voy97375.blogspot.com
Is this possible?
Post a Comment