[Peace-discuss] Re: The Public i and free speech

[Ricky Baldwin]

I may or may not understand it, of course, Carl.  But I figure you believe in free
speech or you don’t.  True, a lot of people are willing to make exceptions for explicit
threats – but not usually for deleting a few words of disputed claims.

Anyway, your argument is particularly curious in light of previous positions you took. 
I seem to recall a leaflet you printed up with AWARE’s name on it – after AWARE had
read the leaflet and expressed the group’s explicit wishes to you: distribute the
leaflet if you like, of course, but without AWARE’s permission to use our name, please
(no threat to sue).  Hm. 

As I’ve said many times I agree with you about 95 percent of the time, but I just can’t
go here with you.  

Ricky

--- "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:

> I don't think you understand what happened in that incident, Ricky.  The Public 
> i proposed to change substantively what I'd written and publish it over my name.
> 
> I had sent them an article, which they had solicited, with the express provision 
> that they had my permission to publish it over my name only if I approved 
> changes -- but they had no permission to publish it with changes that I hadn't 
> approved.   I did that because I knew that there were political differences 
> between me and them (specifically on the virtues of the Democrats). When I was 
> told privately by a member of the editorial board that changes had been made on 
> that subject, and they did not seek my approval, I wrote (several times) to 
> remind them of the written condition I'd attached.
> 
> Only when I received no answer did I write and say that I would sue to defend my 
> contract with them.  At that point Belden -- apparently the eminence grise of 
> the Public i -- called to say that they would publish it only if I withdrew the 
> threat to defend the condition under which I'd contributed the piece.
> 
> Naturally I refused.  At no time did I threaten the Public i's free speech. 
> They are obviously free to publish any opinion they want.  But they were not 
> free to publish my piece without my permission. --CGE
> 
> P.S.--The piece in question appears at 
> <http://www.counterpunch.org/estabrook04162007.html>.
> 
> 
> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> > ... I have to say, in closing, I find it a bit hard to take Carl's defence of
> > free speech totally seriously, given his one-time threat to sue the 'Public
> > i' for having the unmittigated gall to EDIT one such as himself (the
> > nerve!)...
> 



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ