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

[C. G. Estabrook]

BTW, my memory of the leaflet you mention (I think it was critical of Jim Lehrer 
of PBS) is that it read "Prepared by Members of AWARE" -- which it was.  --CGE


Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss