[Peace-discuss] Fw: John Pilger Replies On Lannan Ban On His Film

[C. G. Estabrook]

Curiouser and curiouser.  Probably valuable publicity for the film and copy for 
journalists/bloggers for some time.

How will the liberal media react? Circle the wagons around Lannan, or try to 
find out why he did it?


On 6/17/11 8:13 PM, David Johnson wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Steve Zeltzer <mailto:Lvpsf at igc.org>
> *To:* Undisclosed-recipients: <mailto:Undisclosed-recipients:>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 17, 2011 5:40 PM
> *Subject:* John Pilger Replies On Lannan Ban On His Film
>
> *Crude Censorship*
> /John Pilger Replies On Lannan Ban On His Film
> /
> *By John Pilger*
>
> /*June 16 2011 "Information Clearing House" --* *An open letter to Noam 
> Chomsky and the general public.*/
>
> /*http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28343.htm
> */
> Dear Noam and friends
>
> Patrick Lannan has issued a statement breaking almost a week`s silence since 
> his sudden and unprecedented cancellation of my visit to the Lannan Foundation 
> in Santa Fe for the US premiere of my film, The War You Don`t See. See the 
> statement at www.lannan.org <http://www.lannan.org/>
>
> The reason that Lannan gives for the cancellation is that too few seats were 
> sold for the event on June 15 planned a year ago, in which David Barsamian and 
> I were to be in conversation about the media, US foreign policy and freedom of 
> speech. "In our opinion," writes Lannan, "to have Mr. Pilger travel thousands 
> of miles from London to Santa Fe to face such a low turn-out would have been 
> embarrassing for him."
>
> This is specious at best, absurd in reality. On 9 June, Barbara Ventrello, 
> Lannan`s Director of Cultural Freedom Special Projects, with whom I had been 
> in contact on almost a daily basis in preparation for the event and the 
> screening of my film, emailed me:
>
> "Dear John
>
> I have just received a call from Patrick Lannan ... Something has come up and 
> he has asked me to cancel all events next week. He did not go into details and 
> so I have no idea what this is about, and I apologize ... We thank you for 
> your understanding.
>
> with best regards
>
> Barbara"
>
> If Lannan was cancelling my event because of the low turn-out, the principal 
> organiser Barbara Ventrello would have known. Instead she "has no idea what 
> this is all about".
>
> I replied to her and Patrick Lannan that this presented a horrendous 
> re-organisational situation as Lannan had accepted my offer to stage the US 
> premiere of my film in The Screen cinema in Santa Fe. In his statement, Lannan 
> distorts this as a "request". There was no request. At the time, the reply was 
> that it would be an "honour" to show the film.
> I was later informed by the manager of the cinema that a Lannan official had 
> called to withdraw the advertising for the film. The same official withdrew 
> advertising from the Santa Fe New Mexican and urged the paper to "pull" the 
> major feature it was running about the film.
>
> In my response, I asked that the film`s screening go ahead as its national 
> promotional campaign was linked to the premiere in Santa Fe. This is the reply 
> I received:
>
> "Dear John
>
> I am very sorry, but as stated in my email to you yesterday, all events 
> related to your visit to Santa Fe are canceled. This includes the screening of 
> your film.
>
> Regards
>
> Barbara"
>
> Again, no reason was given. Not one of my subsequent emails and phone calls 
> were returned, and no one called me. I have not known anything like it. Like 
> all of us, the cinema management were shocked. I was informed by groups in 
> Santa Fe who have organised similar events that the idea that too few tickets 
> had been sold for the Pilger/Barsamnian event is "near impossible". When I 
> tried to buy the air ticket Lannan had arranged for me, I was told by the 
> travel agent: "I don`t understand it. They won`t allow you to buy it, even 
> though this ticket, when cancelled, will be worthless. I have never known 
> anything like this."
>
> The truth is that there was not the slightest hint from Lannan until virtually 
> the eve of my departure that my appearance would be anything but "very 
> popular". I don`t know why Patrick Lannan acted the way he did. At the very 
> least, he has demonstrated that his wealth and power give him the capricious 
> license to do what he wants to do when and how he wants to do it and without 
> explanation, regardless of the consequences. Clearly, the tone and barely 
> credible explanation now offered is designed to humiliate me. For him to now 
> claim a self-regarding mantle as a patron of dissenting writers and 
> film-makers, like myself, is disingenuous in the extreme and, again, absurd. 
> Over 40 years an an investigative journalist and film-maker, I have faced 
> similar action in its various guises, and it reveals itself whenever it 
> happens. This is crude censorship however inexplicable and regardless of 
> reputation and patronage.
>
> Regards
>
> John Pilger
>
> /*See also:*/ Lannan credibility suffers self-injury 
> <http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Opinion/Editorial-for-June-16--2011#disqus_thread>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110617/f64a055d/attachment.html>