[Boston-editorial] Bryan Pfeifer

[Sofia JarrinT]

Thanks for the correction.  Yes, Tim clued me in on it
a bit a few days ago.  Maybe we can suck Bryan out of
the WWP and bring him into ours. hahaha

Totalitarian, fascist governments run by a small
oligarchy... I think they all fall in the same
category.

cheers,
sofia

--- Pete Stidman <pstidman at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I agree with your sentiment here, individuals
> deserve
> to be judged on their own merit.  
> 
> but just a point of information on the group that
> Bryan is attached to, the Workers World Party.  
> 
> They support and are rumored to be supported
> financially by Kim Jong Il of North Korea.  They
> openly support Stalin.  This is why people are
> extremely sensitive about this issue.  I suppose
> technically Fascist is a term for the combination of
> corporate and government interests so it isn't
> totally
> accurate here, ruthless totalitarian is probably
> more
> appropriate.  
> 
> -Pete
> 
> --- Sofia JarrinT <sofiajt at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > hi there,
> > I met Bryan at the protest and he seemed nice
> > enough.
> > He also said that he was more interested in
> getting
> > involved with Indymedia and wanted to attend some
> of
> > our meetings. 
> > 
> > I don't think we should judge a writer for the
> group
> > he/she is involved in (of course, unless it's
> > fascist)
> > if her/his reports are accurate and it's good
> > writing.
> > I have not really seen a bias towards that group
> in
> > past articles.
> > 
> > In regards to the Phelps protest, I also was there
> > and
> > I think the confrontation with the police happened
> > towards the end and Bryan might have not even seen
> > it.
> > Most people didn't, actually, since even when we
> > were
> > hanging out with sharpie's friends for lunch, they
> > had
> > no idea it had occurred.  
> > 
> > Moreover, I just re-read Bryan's article and the
> > last
> > paragraph is careful to mention everyone present
> at
> > the protest: "Many local youth and students
> > participated in the anti-Phelps Brookline protest
> as
> > well as members of the AFL-CIO Pride at Work,
> > Anarchist Black Cross, the Communist Party USA,
> Gay
> > and Lesbian Labor Activist Network, the
> > International
> > Action Center, the International Socialist
> > Organization, Fight Imperialism Stand Together
> > (FIST),
> > SEIU Local 509, Stonewall Warriors, UNITE HERE
> Local
> > 26, USWA Local 8751, the Women’s Fightback Network
> > and
> > Workers World Party."
> > 
> > I think he was very careful mentioning everyone
> > there
> > instead of excluding some groups because of
> > conflicts
> > with their ideology. That is good writing to me.
> > 
> > peace,
> > sofia
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- Pete Stidman <pstidman at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > I don't think it would be fair to ban anyone
> from
> > > the
> > > possibility of getting a centered article
> without
> > > first coaching them on improving the quality of
> > the
> > > article.  
> > > 
> > > We know Bryan writes from a certain perspective,
> > but
> > > we don't know that he is tied to limiting his
> > scope
> > > to
> > > that perspective.  Maybe he would cover these
> > other
> > > major things if someone like sharpie emailed him
> > > about
> > > the oversight.  
> > > 
> > > We could see how he reacts to this sort of
> thing. 
> > 
> > > 
> > > We may not like his politics but his coverage is
> > > fairly good, especially his choices of what to
> > > cover. 
> > > And people have been known to change.  No one in
> > our
> > > group has ever had a real conversation with this
> > guy
> > > or even met him in person, am I right?
> > > 
> > > -Pete
> > > 
> > > --- Matthew Williams <mw21 at mindspring.com>
> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Sharpie, you raise interesting issues
> vis-a-vis
> > > > Pfeifer. We've had 
> > > > issues with him before. He once did a report
> on
> > a
> > > > protest and really 
> > > > played up the involvement of WWP and its front
> > > > groups, listing a whole 
> > > > bunch of them and very few other groups (if
> > > > any)--Pete e-mailed him 
> > > > about this and apparently Pfeifer got really
> > > upset,
> > > > although in future 
> > > > articles he didn't play the same game--not
> until
> > > > recently with this 
> > > > Phelps article anyway. And there was a
> question
> > of
> > > > factual accuracy 
> > > > with a previous article of his as well, where
> he
> > > > blew something totally 
> > > > out of proportion--somebody being shoved into
> > > > somebody being punched or 
> > > > something like that.
> > > > 
> > > > On the other side of the coin, he is one of
> our
> > > more
> > > > prolific writers 
> > > > and I fear we wouldn't have any coverage of
> some
> > > > important events if it 
> > > > weren't for him.
> > > > 
> > > > We are thus left in the odd position of
> relying
> > on
> > > a
> > > > group--Workers 
> > > > World Party/International Action
> > > > Center/ANSWER/insert front group 
> > > > here--that many of us don't like or trust (and
> > > > although Pfeifer seems 
> > > > to be their main writer, other WWP people have
> > > > contributed articles as 
> > > > well) for much of our coverage. I have often
> > found
> > > > myself wishing a 
> > > > member of some local group I actually trust
> took
> > > as
> > > > much time as 
> > > > Pfeifer to report on events. But I suppose WWP
> > can
> > > > assign people to 
> > > > certain tasks in a way more democratic groups
> > > can't.
> > > > 
> > > > So, we could just stop featuring his articles
> > out
> > > of
> > > > concern for their 
> > > > accuracy--but then we'd not have coverage of
> > > > important events. I'm 
> > > > frankly ambivalent, although if most people
> felt
> > > > like we shouldn't 
> > > > feature anything by Pfeifer or other WWP
> members
> > > in
> > > > the future, I 
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com