Was I censoring Ken Avidor for writing about the Access Project? Last year I ran against Peter McLaughlin for County Commissioner. He is well known as a supporter of the Access Project, and my campaign focused a great deal of attention on that question. I was most critical of the flyover ramp which would have taken a large number of homes, created an eyesore in South Minneapolis, and reduced the number of hours of daylight for residents living under its arching shadow. The election was in many ways a referendum on the access project, and Peter beat me 4 to 1 in the precincts most affected by the proposed ramp. If it was a referendum, then Peter certainly won it. In spite of his convincing victory the project made concessions to the immediate residents and eliminated the flyover ramp. There are some diehard antagonists who continue to oppose the project and malign anyone who might support it. But, for me, having gone one-on-one on this issue and lost convincingly, the issue seems settled. It cost me a lot of time, money and psychic energy to earn this black eye, and I am content that it is over. There are other battles and worse enemies.
EY: Then how would the election of Robert Lilligren be explained? Part of the reason Robert ran was because of his strong opposition to the Access/Excess project. I do know a number of Access Project opponents who wrote in candidates rather than voting for either Peter McLaughlin or Eddie Felien. I also know of Access Project opponents who voted for Peter McLaughlin despite his stands on that issue.
And David Brauer responded to my message about Intimidation Tactics Against Cartoonists by Southwest Journal.
Brauer starts by quoting Janis Hall's letter that I posted on the issues list under a nom de plume (and I appologised to E Democracy for that one btw - and I'm not the only E Democracy list manager or former list manager who has posted to E Democracy lists under nom de plumes). I also got 6 months added to my sentence for this one. This letter is still available at the Stride site. I can't get to the letter from the Stride Main page.
http://www.stride-mn.org/newspaper/SWJnotpleased.htm
There was NO legal threat. That doesn't mean we can't ask people not to use images we own when we disagree with what they're doing. We felt it was common courtesy, if nothing else.
EY: If what you mean, there was no threat of "I'll see you in court" in this letter - that's correct. However, clearly this letter is what lawyers advise for newspapers in this situation.
Brauer:
Final proof is that the photo was never removed - a bit was erased (replaced with the word "CENSORED," even though there was no censor) but the devil's horns stayed.
EY: From talking with Ken Avidor about this, he said he had talked with other cartoonists, and that they told him it was expensive to fight these things - even if legally they could win. Apparently there's some legalism for how high of a percentage of the original photo is used, so the body of Johnson was deleted from the photo, so Stride could claim to have less than the legal percentage of the photo in their adaptation of the photo.
Brauer: We didn't sue.
Nor would we.
Please, this second-hand information is proving frequently wrong. And these old grudges really need to be put to bed.
EY: I didn't say Southwest Journal sued. They just sent a cease and decist letter, and the photo was modified to protect Ken Avidor from a lawsuit. My guess is Brauer was nitpicking about this part of my post:
But Avidor has his name on the site, so he got the legal contact.
Correction: But Avidor has his name on the site, so he got contacted by Southwest Journal's Publisher. It's not clear to me from Stride's site whether the email was cced to SW Journal's attorney. Typically such communications are. I'm also not clear whether SW Journal Contacted Avidor again after the photo had been doctored again so there was less of SW Journal and more from Stride on it, and told them this settled the matter.
As far as whether Smith Parker or Peter McLaughlin have any editorial control over what goes into Pulse. I find that one quite a stretch.
Eva Young
Near North
Minneapolis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog is up:
http://lloydletta.blogspot.com
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
