Guidelines

I have established this blog as a means of transparency to the public, outreach to the community, and information dissemination to all who choose to look. Feedback is welcome, but because public participation is equally encouraged, appropriate language and decorum is mandatory.
Showing posts with label Ambush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ambush. Show all posts

Friday, May 31, 2019

Ambush at the PNJ “Corral”

My "Interview" with the 2-person editorial board of the Pensacola News Journal today felt like a total ambush job...read about it below.


My Spidey Sense was telling me something was amiss…  This is/was the first time I have ever been asked to sit down and talk with the entire two-person editorial board of the PNJ.  And what did I do to elicit this invitation?  Well, as I have done dozens of times over the last 13 years, I had emailed in an op-ed for the PNJ’s consideration.  Here is the 600 word guest editorial I sent them on Wednesday evening.

But instead of a yes or no (or pocket veto)—I was asked to come sit down and talk to the two-person editorial board (+Jim Little was brought in as well) earlier today.

Immediately, I was attacked by Andy Marlette.  He had an almost rabid look in his eyes as he began questioning me on a host of topics the second I sat down in the conference room and editor Lisa Savage joined us…

“You wrote on your blog for years that I called you and told you to stop making parody manipulations of my cartoons—but that isn’t true—I never called you!”  he said accusingly.  I told him that Jeremy Knipper from the PNJ called on his behalf and said “Andy doesn’t like you using his cartoons--stop”  Which is a fact.  So yes, there is a distinction; Andy told Jeremy Knipper to call me on his behalf to say I couldn’t use his cartoons.  It is a distinction with no difference.  Nevertheless, I said to Andy’s representative at that time--“you’ve got that wrong, go ask your attorneys.”  And Jeremy called back later to say “Yeah, you can use them.”  Andy didn’t like that part of today’s meeting, I guess….

He then looked over to his editor, in almost a tattle-tale whine, and said “He is taking my cartoons and changing them around and changing the words!”  and he continued “I don’t think it is legal, It’s not legal for him to do this, right?!?”  The editor responded to me “I don’t think you can do that, but we will check, I’ll ask Barbara about this.”  (I assumed this is their lawyer).  I simply stated the cartoons I manipulated were a parody, clearly marked and subject to fair use as such, and that I continue to believe it is legal to utilize them for parody.  (They will probably reach out to a senior attorney within their Gannett organization, probably a sharp conservative lawyer, and they will get their answer which will probably not align with what they think the answer should be, I suspect.)

Meanwhile—the question barrage was about to begin.

Andy started a series of rapid-fire questions.  “What do you think about the small number of minorities in leadership in the county?”  “What do you think should be done about this?”  What do you think I meant when I drew your last name next to a confederate rebel flag in multiple cartoons?”  “Why do you NOT think Senator Philip Beall was a racist?”  “Who said Philip Beall was a white-supremacist?” “Do you blog anonymously?” “Are you homophobic?”

I felt like I was being grilled.  A few times he busted out in an almost nervous bout of laughter.  It was weird.

“Why can’t you tell us about all the important legislation that Senator Beall sponsored while he was in the senate for 7 years?”  (I guess they thought I ought to be able to regurgitate his legislative record on command, on the spot, from memory?)

“None of Beall’s family live in the area any more—what do you make of that?”

“Why should we keep the Beall name on the Bridge—what does it matter?”

I took their gunfire and answered their questions for an hour.  I don’t think they liked my answers or the fact that I would not answer some of the questions the way they wanted me to answer them.  They did not like the fact that I pushed back against their line of questioning and held fast and stood up to them.  Here are some examples of their questions and my answers:
Jeff Bergosh:  “Andy—what did you think of the first bridge committee meeting”

Andy Marlette:  “I don’t know”

Jeff Bergosh: “You were there—what do you mean you don’t know?”

Andy Marlette:  “I guess it just seemed disorganized and not productive”

Jeff Bergosh:  “What do you mean? The elected a chair, set the meeting dates, decided upon goals and objectives, and the format for the meetings—I think they accomplished a lot!”

Andy Marlette:  “What does the “American Grizzly” and “Bear Magazine ”in your version of my