Fellow bloggers, I apologize for my absence. If I’d been more attentive, I might have been able to smooth things over before the rupture between Peter Galuszka and the new publishers of the Bacon’s Rebellion e-zine took place (see previous post). Here’s what’s going on.
Mike Thompson, president of the Jefferson Institute for Public Policy and a long-time contributor to the e-zine, approached me after I ceased publication and offered to take over. (Read his profile and the list of columns he and his associates have written here.) We thought it would be worthwhile to provide a platform for the contributors to the “old” e-zine should they still desire one. Because of my new obligations, I would not have time to edit it, as I used to do, although I might contribute a column from time to time.
The Jefferson Institute is a Northern Virginia think tank that, like Bacon’s Rebellion, focuses on public policy issues in Virginia. The organization espouses a pragmatic free market/fiscal conservatism approach that I was comfortable with. However, Mike agreed to maintain the open spirit of the e-zine, keeping it open to a wide variety of viewpoints — a key point that I insisted upon and Mike readily agreed to. Although Mike and his team would take over editing and distribution of the e-zine (and posting the e-zine on the website), they have agreed to run any columns past me before publication. I have the right under our agreement to exercise veto rights over any content I deem incompatible with Bacon’s Rebellion brand. I continue to “own” the e-zine. However, the e-zine will bear a tag-line saying, “published by the Jefferson Institute,” or something very similar, to reflect its new role.
It was my intention to announce the new arrangement in concert with publication of the first edition, which is coming out shortly. I will post the columns to this blog for public comment, as I did for the “old” e-zine.
Otherwise, there will be no connection between the e-zine and the Bacon’s Rebellion blog, which I continue personally to moderate and contribute to (although my presence has been diminished of late). Neither Mike nor any of his associates have posting rights to the blog, nor have they asked for them. As far as I know, they do not even participant in the comments section of the blog. Peter is free to continue posting to this blog as long as he wants to.
Some time ago, I issued invitations to participants of the “old” e-zine to contribute to the new publication. Not everyone chose to do so. Norm Leahy, a valued, long-time e-zine columnist and poster to this blog, will not contribute. He is affiliated with Tertium Quids, a conservative, non-partisan advocacy group that has issues with the Jefferson Institute. Several other columnists, including Peter, did agree to participate.
Peter submitted a column, “RIP to Immigrant Bashers” (which he subsequently posted on this blog). Kiel Stone, the first-line editor, made mainly minor, stylistic edits. As I understand it, he passed on the edited column to Mike, who made the call to delete one particular line referring to the King James Bible as being the preferred version of immigrant bashers. When Peter reviewed the edited version, he took exception to the cut on the grounds of both substance and editorial integrity.
I was aware of this issue early Friday morning but did not have time at the time to respond thoughtfully. For the record, had I had a chance, I would have urged Mike not to delete the phrase. While I personally regard the King James Bible as one of the greatest works of English literature, and while I can understand how those who would revere it would find the reference offensive, Peter is free to offend whom he pleases. He has legitimate reasons (based on the mis-use of the KJV by nativist groups) for making his statement, so his statement falls within the bounds of reasoned discourse. The whole point of Bacon’s Rebellion is to include a diversity of viewpoints — including sharply expressed views that may make me uncomfortable.
Unfortunately, while I was at work Friday, a series of emails between Mike and Peter resulted in a breech that would seem impossible to repair. Then Peter went public with his post on this blog, prompting this explanation. So, that’s the story, folks. I apologize for failing to intervene in a timely manner and quietly settle the issue behind the scenes.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.