Anaheim and OC Register Owner Ink Exclusive Solicitation Agreement for ARTIC Naming Rights

Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC)

Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC)

We’re scratching our heads, again, and it’s Anaheim that’s causing our itch. Yesterday, the OC Register’s parent company Freedom Communications announced that it has signed a letter of intent with the City of Anaheim for the exclusive rights to solicit the naming rights from a corporate sponsor for the new Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center, a.k.a. “ARTIC.” The agreement, dated June 19, 2013 gives the Register one year to find a corporate sponsor. The details of the almost two-month old letter of intent have yet to be finalized into an actual contract which would have to be approved by the city council.

The Register reported yesterday:

Kushner declined to discuss the potential value of such a deal, nor how much Freedom would be paid if a sponsor is found.

“The basic logic is that we are the only significant media business in Orange County, and we want to use that to bring a sponsor to pay for a project that would otherwise be paid by taxpayers,” Kushner said.

A sponsorship deal would likely help the city pay off the 13.5-acre property it purchased last year from the Orange County Transportation Authority to build ARTIC, a 67,000-square-foot terminal that would provide access to Amtrak, Metrolink, buses, taxis and perhaps a high-speed railway. Anaheim agreed to purchase the land from the OCTA for $32.5 million.

Construction began last September on a $184.2 million facility on the land, which is expected to open in late 2014. That complex will be paid for by county, state and federal funds.

The agreement has ruffled a few feathers and raised concerns by from Mayor Tom Tait that such an agreement might influence the Register’s coverage of city business. Specifically there is concern that the Register could in effect become an “agent of the government” in conflict with its journalistic responsibility as a government watchdog.

Tait told Voice of OC; “Not only do I question the need for such an agreement, I have serious concerns about creating a financial partnership with our local newspaper, which also serves as a watchdog for the citizens over matters at City Hall.”

Kushner explained his point of view on the matter of conflict of interest in the Register story:

“Just because someone has a business relationship with the Register, it does not affect how the news side operates,” Kushner said. “If you can’t have a business relationship with someone you report on, then we wouldn’t have any advertisers in the paper.”

From the Voice of OC story yesterday:

While gaining praise for adding 175 newsroom staffers and expanding its news content at a time when most papers have been cutting back on coverage, he’s been hammered by critics for other business deals and what they claim are efforts to appease the political establishment.

Voice of OC revealed in February that the Register had changed its political ad policy after two Anaheim councilwomen complained to Register co-owner Eric Spitz about ads from a local activist that criticized their votes for a controversial hotel subsidy.

In the wake of that controversy, [Publisher Aaron] Kushner raised eyebrows in the media industry when he told newsroom staff that journalists shouldn’t abide by the long-held journalism credo of “afflicting the comfortable.”

From where we sit, such agreements create an appearance of conflict of interest, and we are suspicious that the line which Kushner claims is drawn between business relationships and news coverage, is more dotted than solid. We have seen before how coverage, particularly negative coverage of powerful political interests, is conveniently toned down, or buried, inside the “subscribers-only internet pages of the Register. To find an example we have to dig no deeper than the Register’s coverage of Tuesday’s contentious council meeting discussion over the continuation of a contract with the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce to manage Enterprise Zones, a program that expires by law on December 31, 2013.

The Register’s coverage, at least on their internet site, never made it to the politics and government section of the publication. It is found deep inside the barely noticeable “Cities” section. That coverage, barely scratched the surface of describing the level of conflict and animosity the mere discussion of the matter caused the Council. Absent any other sources on the story, Register readers are left with the impression that it was a simple matter of Mayor Tait and his council colleagues being out of sync in their thinking.

It took almost two months for public disclosure of the ARTIC letter of intent, and there has yet to be an actual contract established that specifies how much the sponsorship solicitation agreement will benefit the Register’s owners. Kushner has placed his publication in the unenviable position of having to take additional steps to show that their objectivity on Anaheim government matters. The proof will be shown over time in how they cover the city.

Fortunately, there are other media outlets, that can help hold their hypothetical feet to the fire. Be it the Voice of OC, Los Angeles Times, or local watchdog blogs, the truth will be published. We suspect that shortcomings in OC Register coverage, should they exist, will be exposed no matter how uncomfortable..

  32 comments for “Anaheim and OC Register Owner Ink Exclusive Solicitation Agreement for ARTIC Naming Rights

  1. Jason Young
    August 16, 2013 at 9:03 am

    During negotiations for this deal Eastman and Murray complained about my political ad content and then suddenly the Register started censoring my ad content. Something to think about.

  2. August 16, 2013 at 10:29 am

    The Register can censor your ad content. Your First Amendment Rights only mean the government cannot restrict your right to free speech. The Register is a private entity and it can.

    When people go nuts about the NSA surveillance program, they forget that Google, Facebook, Verizon and Twitter already collect tons of information on you that is willfully signed away. That isn’t a 4th amendment issue either.

    There are other publications and outlets for your ad that won’t censor your content; Try advertising there.

  3. Jason Young
    August 16, 2013 at 10:51 am

    Dan I understand they have the right to censor my content but the fact that they only changed their policy after complaints from council during negotiations for this deal makes me sick.

  4. Dan Chmielewski
    August 16, 2013 at 5:38 pm

    Try some Pepto Bismal then; last time I checked, ads are supposed to be truthful and I don’t believe the ads you wanted to run passed the truthiness test. But when you whine about the Register violating your First Amendment rights, it’s clear you don’t understand what the First Amendment is…..

    For example, if someone left a comment on your blog about your criminal case and you deleted it, are you violating their free speech rights or just censoring? You aren’t the government and you can delete the comment.

    But when one spends money to advertise something, just what did you hope the outcome would be? Like I said before, if you want to help Tom Tait and Cynthia Ward, do anything they ask but stop being the face/voice of the opposition. Matt doing legitimate work for the Tilted Kilt compared to you and Vern spending time in jail does not help Tom Tait.

  5. Cynthia Ward
    August 16, 2013 at 5:41 pm

    Actually the detail we overlook in the “censor Jason” story is not that the register changed their ad policy (which they are free to do as a private business) or that the timing is incredibly hinky given it followed on the heels of the meetings with Eastman and Murray, certainly giving rise to some quid pro quo talk. What is absolutely NOT ok is that they did it with City staff in the room! PRA requests show meetings at both the Register and City Hall, and all were attended by Eastman and Murray, and some level of City staff, including the City Manager (at the time) staff from his office, and the assorted assistants of the Council members. That, my friends, if the definition of “public funds” and the discussion of paid political speech under those circumstances is highly verboten.

    Now if you want an eyebrow raiser, look at coverage from register before and after the deal, when the Watchdog is not pursuing the Chamber deal, the streetcar, or any of the other insane spending schemes that would have caught their attention in the past, one has to ask, what changed? Bingo!

    We wonder why the Council majority has been so incredibly obnoxious, well this is why. They are at liberty to literally thumb their noses at taxpayers while asking, “Who are you gonna tell? The newspaper?” Meanwhile the LA Times might want to add a few more reporters to the OC beat, the one they have to cover the whole County could be used up in Anaheim alone! Step it up LA Times, I might switch my subscription for the first time in my life!

  6. Jason Young
    August 17, 2013 at 9:48 am

    Dan – send me your e-mail address and I’ll send you every ad we every proposed in addition to the ones we ran. They never turned down an ad due to the content but wouldn’t allow me to name names or add photos of the subjects of the ads following their negotiations with the city.

    My ads were always truthful, check out this quote from attorney Cory Briggs “The Register just buckled,” said Cory J. Briggs, the attorney who represented the activists in the suit and considers the subsidy ad that angered the council members to be factually accurate.”

  7. Cynthia Ward
    August 17, 2013 at 10:33 am

    It’s funny, Jason and I rarely agree on politics, and we often disagree on the presentation of the information he has unearthed, but I cannot fault him for the passion and dedication he has put into trying to expose wrongdoing and make Anaheim a better place. Every ad he has ever run was factually correct, I have not once seen him print something untrue in his Anaheim Bulletin pieces, and to his credit even when I have an issue with something I see on his site he will often go in and change it if I tell him why I see a problem, and that is a rare thing in the blogosphere.

    The downside is that Jason is not a trained journalist, and the manner in which he presents information is not always as polished as the well oiled machine over here at Dan’s world. We have a passionate, energetic gem of a man who is coming across information that NEEDS to be shared with the public, and he has no training or experience (or HELP) in getting that information out, and then we blame him (or the Mayor) when the execution isn’t as polished as the very nice wedding videos he produces.

    I think a lot of it is imagery. The human brain takes in more info from an image than it does through text, so while a message may be factual, the images that accompany the true information convey a more malicious intent than I believe he understands. I would love to see someone with experience in publishing help him channel that passion and research into something that more properly communicates his vision for a better Anaheim. Can we find a way for everyone to pull together in one direction? Preferably one that results in some seats changing over in November so we can all stop putting in so much unpaid time babysitting our elected leaders?

    Is there a venue where Jason’s hard work pulling up research can be used by those who do have the training to communicate it in proper context, perhaps a bi partisan “all Anaheim news” type cooperative venue?

    The evil at City Hall has become so blatant, that opposing it transcends political parties, common sense and love of community is not partisan, and it is going to take every one of us using every skill and talent we have available to fight back (seeing as how none of us have actual money) and I would prefer to find a way to channel and harness Jason’s energy into something positive than simply bash him over the head like a baby seal on a greenpeace poster.

  8. Greg Diamond
    August 17, 2013 at 10:33 am

    You’ve jumped the gun here. They haven’t “inked an agreement” yet; the City Council hasn’t voted on it. The City Manager’s office has signed a “letter of intent.” Now both the City and the Register may consider approving the final contract.

    Hey, Dan — at what point does a private entity working in concert with the government become subject to the limitations of the First Amendment? There’s an interesting story idea for you.

    • August 17, 2013 at 6:02 pm

      Greg, while I understand your point, I see ink on the letter of intent, Hence the inked deal. The contract isn’t inked, but I don’t doubt there’s going to be a contract.

  9. Cynthia Ward
    August 17, 2013 at 10:40 am

    BTW there were some unpublished factors related to his issues with the law as a young man, and knowing what they were i would honestly say that I would give Jason Young my debit card and pin on any day of the week, (not that he would get far with it given the balance) he could have my house keys or car keys, his trustworthiness in this area is not an issue with me or my family in any way. I would not ever make that offer regarding Matt Cunningham, a man who has no record to my knowledge.

  10. Dan Chmielewski
    August 17, 2013 at 11:16 am

    There is no evidence that the Government forced the Register to do anything

  11. Dan Chmielewski
    August 17, 2013 at 11:17 am

    My email address is on this site if you want to look around for it. And I will ask again, what was the expected outcome you hooped the ads would accomplish?

  12. Dan Chmielewski
    August 17, 2013 at 11:18 am

    Terrific Cynthia — I don’t share your level of trust about Jason and I’d venture much of Anaheim doesn’t either.

  13. Jason Young
    August 17, 2013 at 11:23 am

    Dan, my hope was that through my ads, the Anaheim public would be made aware of what was really going on at City Hall. The Register makes little to no effort to expose the evil doings of the council majority. In fact, since this deal was inked they seem to have become champions of the council majority in their editorial section. Which is a huge shift from the last election.

  14. Jason Young
    August 17, 2013 at 2:32 pm

    Dan you don’t know me, so I wouldn’t expect you to trust me. However, I didn’t realize you spoke for the rest of Anaheim as well. Why don’t you stick to the issues instead of trying to tear down the messenger. This Register deal with the city is outrageous and instead of debating that topic you attack me. You’re starting to act a lot like Matt Cunningham.

  15. August 17, 2013 at 6:15 pm

    Dan,

    I’m with Cynthia on this one. While Jason’s method of presentation may not always sit well with the established elite, he for a long time was the only messenger. The advertising issue is a valid concern. It is common for elected officials to attempt to use their influence and powerful friends to influence the media. The Register may have the right to censor the ad content they run for accuracy, but that is NOT what they did. They specifically prevented any advertising critical of council members by name. To my knowledge, Jason did not squeal that his first amendment rights were being violated. He expressed outrage that the Register would cave to pressure from elected officials. When you add to this Mr. Kutchner’s comment about afflicting the comfortable, it becomes clear that this is more about influence and less about truth.

    I agree that calling Matt an exploiter of women because of his work for the Tilted Kilt is way over the top, and likely libel. But don’t shoot Jason for calling out the appearance of corruption and influence peddling involving Anaheim City Hall. It has been proven that there is a THERE there.

  16. Dan Chmielewski
    August 18, 2013 at 10:53 am

    Likewise Jason, you don’t know me. I didn’t realize *you* speak for the rest of Anaheim.

    No argument about the Register’s deal with the city being ethically slippery; you’ll have to watch for coverage/non-coverage to determine if editorial is getting directions from the publisher’s office. I don’t believe there’s a firewall between advertising and editorial here but no such firewall exists between the paper and the special editions they publish for UCI and CSUF where the PR departments are “content consultants.”

    And there are plenty of media watchdogs out there to alert.

    I am not attacking you; but I think you are a poor advocate for residents of Anaheim. If you truly want to help, ask Tait and Ward how to best do it and follow their instructions. Problem is, you seem incapable of that. And all you do is give fodder to the council majority to distract from the real issues here.

    If that’s an attack, you need thicker skin.

  17. Dan Chmielewski
    August 18, 2013 at 10:55 am

    Actually, Jason did complain about the censoring and his First Amendment rights being violated at VOC and OJ Blogs…

    I’d argue the publicity about the Register’s ad policy was far more effective than any ad he would have put up.

  18. Dan Chmielewski
    August 18, 2013 at 11:02 am

    And once the public made aware of the “evil doings” (really? evil? your bar is very low), what did you expect the public to do? March on city hall with torches?

    The Register favoring the work of Republican-dominated city councils! Stop the press. This is an old story; the only party the Register has ever care about is to the right of center. You’re surprised by this?

    The denial of your ads and the Register’s “clarification” on its ad policy accomplished far more than any ad you could run. On a straight communications front, you ads, no matter how truthful, really didn’t serve any purpose. There’s no call to action, there’s no benefit to the reader, and there are a number of options you could have done other than advertising in the paper. Radio would have been a comparable option, OC Weekly, and a variety of other publications, blogs, and broadcast outlets.

  19. Dan Chmielewski
    August 18, 2013 at 11:19 am

    Greg — The decision not to run Jason’s ads were the Register’s. They aren’t the only game in town and I’d argue those sort of advocacy ads without a call to action are a waste of the reader’s time.

    “Anaheim’s city council is evil” Oooooooo, what should I do about it.

    At what point does a blog post complete with multiple photos of strippers and a description of what goes on inside said establishment come off as accurate because a consultant you don’t like did work for a different business entity of said Strip Club’s owners? And is one sued for libel, is it possible that you saved the first cut of the blog post which was most libelous or would you stand by the draft that’s been changed multiple times to avoid a charge of libel?

  20. Jason Young
    August 18, 2013 at 11:50 am

    Dan – I simply wanted to inform the public and I appreciate your feedback.

  21. Dan Chmielewski
    August 18, 2013 at 12:38 pm

    The public is duly informed. Now what?

  22. Cynthia Ward
    August 18, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    Dan, I hope that as the public sees a consistent pattern over time of the same elected leaders acting and spending money in ways that is inconsistent with the Republican core values they claimed when they ran for office, the ultimate result would be that those citizens would decline to return the RINOs to office,
    There is some value to setting the stage for dissent prior to being bombarded by mail just as the elected ramps up, perhaps make voters rethink the glossy postcards they are getting, funded by Disney, knowing what they know going in ahead of the silly season.

    As far as the ever changing post from Vern, he toned it down because I asked him to.

    Can we take this offline? Come for dinner, Dan, Greg, Jason, Chris, come talk face to face and find some common ground. Because the enemy is not each other, the issues we are dealing with here in the crony capitalism are bi partisan common sense issues we can all come together on. The enemy is out there spending money Anaheim’s residents cannot afford to lose, and we are getting distracted by all of this bickering.

    Let’s set down the knives and pick up some forks, my treat.

  23. Greg Diamond
    August 18, 2013 at 3:30 pm

    I wasn’t disputing that there was ink on paper, Chris, I was disputing what that paper accomplished. I too fully expect there to be a contract — unless you and I and a few others embarrass them out of it — which is why I said that you were premature rather than incorrect.

  24. Greg Diamond
    August 18, 2013 at 3:53 pm

    Dan, you’re not doing yourself any favors here as the self-appointed oracle of journalistic ethics, but if that’s what you want I’ll give you a few minutes.

    (1) “The decision not to run Jason’s ads were the Register’s.”

    Can that line excuse every improper influence of power, including government power, on a newspaper? Would you advise a client to suggest to the main newspaper in an area that the paper’s not complying with their wishes to avoid negative publicity could cost them money?

    (2) “They aren’t the only game in town”

    Of course not — Jason could, for example, buy ads here, or in the Pennysaver. Does your argument strike you as compelling, or as flawed?

    (3) “I’d argue those sort of advocacy ads without a call to action are a waste of the reader’s time.”

    Criticizing public officials for their actions is ineffective? So all of those “Call Barbara Boxer and tell her to oppose laws against cattle mutilation” (or whatever) ads are just pointless? And did you really just suggest “wasting the reader’s time” as the standard by which to judge print activism?

    (4) “‘Anaheim’s city council is evil’ Oooooooo, what should I do about it.”

    Jason seems to have come up with one answer to that question. You would seem qualified to offer another one, perhaps a better one, if so disposed.

    (5) “At what point does a blog post complete with multiple photos of strippers argle bargle bargle …?”

    I told you, I’m not going to discuss potentially pending litigation with you. For the record, though, I can’t parse your first sentence.

    (6) “I have decided to spend an inordinate amount of effort here defending Matt Cunningham, despite the fact that the article at hand is about a potentially much more serious and heinous breach of journalistic ethics by the Register.”

    I’m glad that you raise the point, Dan, although I have to admit that the above is a paraphrase. Why are you so very exercised by the exploration of the link — however tight or loose it is — between this mercenary Republican hack and the owners of a strip club who were trying to move into a somewhat more respectable business? If you’re suddenly bent on become the Avenging Angel of unfair characterizations, you should certainly have no shortage of material to keep you busy. And yet Pore Ol’ Matt seems to have captured your attention and raised your gorge. Is this a matter of “honor among PR professionals, who must never be judged by their voluntary choice of clients” or something? Or did Matt just come squalling desperately to you for help?

  25. August 19, 2013 at 11:52 am

    wow Greg, lots to cover:
    #1 — Jason alluded to censorship and a violation of his First Amendment rights. The Register is not the government and can infringe on his “free” speech even he was willing to pay for it. If it were a government entity, using their authority to squash his First Amendment rights, that’s completely different. People seem to misinterpret the First Amendment all the time and Jason did.
    #2 — I’d suspect a radio ad on KFI would have a better ROI than a print ad in the Register for what Jason hooped to accomplish; especially if it was a drive time ad.
    #3 Yes, in my opinion, print ads for activism seldom generate a desired response.
    #4 Yes, better engagement of Latino voters to develop strong voter registration and GOTV efforts. How about some good candidates. Let Disney spend millions; they still need votes to get their way. If the Latino community in Anaheim is unable to find good candidates, register voters, manage solid GOTV efforts, they get the government they deserve.
    #5 The multiple photos of strippers complete with a description of the activity inside suggesting Matt Cunningham worked for the “club” is an embarrassment to your blog. I don’t blame you for not wanting to argue about it. The images and description were designed to drive hits. The argument that Matt worked for the strip club was lame. Edits needed to be added to keep it from out and out libel. What a direct example? You and Vern were closely associated with the OccupyOC movement; you manned the mic in Irvine, you spoke before the city council, showing leadership to a leaderless organization. While no reports of violence in OC, you were part of a larger movement where rapes, assaults and other acts of violence were committed on the part of Occupy protesters. By Vern’s logic, would it be fair to associate you two with acts of rape, assault and violence? No.

    Lastly, I am not arguing about the breach of journalistic ethics by the Register. Media Partners engage in all manner of business opportunities all the time and newspapers need new avenues of revenue. If reporters and editors ignore Anaheim or dismiss the complete story or write clearly biased news, as consumers you can organize boycotts of the paper and its advertisers. It was very effective against Rush Limbaugh for his Sandra Fluke flap. The same can be done to the Register. Would Jason and Vern be effective leaders of said boycott? You tell me.

    This isn’t so much a defense of Matt Cunningham as it is a case of journalistic ethics. And Greg, do not lecture me about the ethics of the Register when its clear your blog has no sense of ethics either. There is a word for it Greg — hypocrite.

  26. Cynthia Ward
    August 20, 2013 at 8:07 pm

    …..so who is coming for dinner? Otherwise i have to bring Jason to Drinking Liberally. Your choice.

  27. Greg Diamond
    August 20, 2013 at 11:48 pm

    (1) Right — but that doesn’t address what I said in my comment (1) above. I can reiterate it, but it’s just a few comments up so that should be unnecessary.

    (2) Radio ads are ephemeral. Print ads are (more or less) permanent. Yes, you can quibble with that — but would you rather leaf through 10 print ads to get a sense of what’s going on or have to listen to 10 30-second radio spots?

    (3) So you’re criticizing him for not optimizing his activist efforts? OK, rather than grade him on an absolute scale, let’s use a curve: what had *you* done to address this problem at the time Jason was putting up ads? I’d done some, but not nearly as much. I don’t follow the thrust of your critique here — he failed to anticipate what you consider the most effective modalities? So?

    (4) I’d better not respond to this let-them-eat-cake-ism.

    (5) I’m not arguing about it with you here because of the prospect that I would end up dealing with it in court. I’d love to argue about it, actually, but I won’t be goaded into it. (This is me wearing my lawyer hat.) Good evening.

  28. Dan Chmielewski
    August 21, 2013 at 8:27 am

    Cynthia — hard to break away for a dinner while I still have kids at home to feed and a wife who works crazy hours. I won’t be at DL tomorrow or next week for that matter. Try that first Thursday in September.

  29. Dan Chmielewski
    August 21, 2013 at 8:54 am

    Your question in #1 makes little sense Greg; I read it several times and still am not sure what you’re asking.

    “Can that line excuse every improper influence of power, including government power, on a newspaper?”

    Governments have tried shutting out papers, denying reporters access and a variety of tactics but they cannot prevent sources from talking or news from getting out. Companies are far worse when it comes to “media boycotts.” I do not believe that government has any power over the Register but certainly do believe the Republican Party in OC does. Again, take it up with the publisher of the Register for the change in policy which was written up in several other publications and those stories got more attention about Anaheim government than any ad Jason could publish.

    Print ads are only as permanent until the next day’s edition comes out. If you want to illicit the sense of outrage about the Anaheim city council Jason wanted to convey, the radio drive time audience would be more receptive to the message and more likely to actually engage a simple call to action. The John and Ken crowd is especially attuned to “taxpayer rip offs.”

    Greg, my activism is directed mostly in the city I live. I don’t live in Anaheim. You don’t live there. Matt Cunningham doesn’t live there. Vern doesn’t live there. And Jason Young no longer lives there. I will be very active in Irvine registering new Democrats and working on GOTV efforts to return the city council to a Democratic majority.

    Re #4, seriously? People who go and vote determine their fate. If the majority of Latino voters in Anaheim don’t go to the polls, I fail to see how redistricting — which is the same plan as Santa Ana’s — is going to make that big of a difference.

    #5, sure you’d love to argue it but your defenses are going to be very week here. I just hope you saved every cut of the post as it continued to change and with each update to correct misinformation, the deeper the hole you dig. Frankly the lack of ethics on that post renders your criticism of the Register’s media ethics, in regards to a possible deal with Anaheim, do as I say not as I do. Three photos of strippers? Really. Why not 5 or 10? Let’s complain about strip clubs objectifying women as we objectify them in this post. Weak sauce counselor.

    Would you advise a client to suggest to the main newspaper in an area that the paper’s not complying with their wishes to avoid negative publicity could cost them money?

    • Greg Diamond
      August 21, 2013 at 9:35 am

      (1) The government has the power to give the Register money, or not, for naming rights — just before the election — and this lends itself to de facto friendly extortion. The Orange Lady can’t afford to piss off the Council.

      (2) You’re presuming that the effect of print ads ends after their publication — rather than continuing to exist in a (republishable and linkable) portfolio. For the sort of PR that you do, you may be right — but I don’t know that you have that much experience with long-time-horizon insurgent campaigns against high odds. The tactics for those differ. Anyway: Jason’s money, Jason’s call.

      (3) I get so tired of the “you don’t live there so butt out” response on the blogs. It shouldn’t even require refutation, but if I don’t live in my neighbor’s house where he (hypothetically) beats his children and his wife, that does not mean that it’s wrong for me to intervene to try to stop it. (And that answer doesn’t even bother get to the Brazilian rain forests and the famine in Sudan.) The comfortable misbehavior rife in OC depends on people looking the other way because “they don’t live there.” Well, to hell with that low level of ambition.

      (4) People tend not to vote if they consider it hopeless. People tend not to vote if people aren’t trying to get them to vote because of their history of not voting. All that can change. And it’s the plan that the Council is implementing that is like Santa Ana’s, not the plan that activists are proposing (which is like, among many others, the California legislature’s.)

      (5) Re discussing a prospective case: did I not explain myself clearly enough above? Do I need to come up with some baroque analogy to make the point?

  30. Dan Chmielewski
    August 21, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    #1, but the government did not and no “extortion” was committed. Private businesses can solicit bids for naming rights. None of this changes the fact that Jason’s First Amendment Rights were not impacted by Anaheim City Government but censored by the Orange County Register which has a right to refuse service to anyone in much the same way a restaurant or bar can.

    Printed ads tend to have a shorter shelf life than editorial content; editorial is more easily found on the Internet whereas ads typically need some sort of content management tags to be found; local advocacy ads should be designed to urge action; Jason’s was for education. I stand by my reasoning.

    #3 – I agree with you; We both write for county blogs and should be able to cover anything in the county. But your question was what I am doing specifically in Anaheim? I’m not involved in voter registration or GOTV efforts, but I have had a series of meetings with people to listen and provide my opinion on strategy; I’d call it consulting except I won’t accept a dime for it. Suffice to say, there are several great places to have lunch in Downtown Anaheim. ;)

    #4 – What a crock; the last election was a presidential race. Are you telling me Latino voters stayed home because they lost hope on the downticket races? Lame Greg. $10 says Curt Pringle is already lining up candidates by ward to run when the council pushes their plan through. Hopefully a judge will change the rules so that each election is ward specific and not city wide.

    #5 The fact you won’t discuss your post because of possible pending legal action is pretty much a signed confession you should be worried about libel and defamation. It was sloppy reporting, slopping writing. I’d be embarrassed if I were you. Here’s a tip. Matt publishes a blog about Anaheim that is loaded with posts that can be opposed on the strength of ideas alone. Instead of taking the high road, you guys drove into the gutter. You never answered my question; just how many photos of stripper’s thongs are needed to hammer home a point. Two, three, ooo let’s not forget that spreadeagled pole dance move (only one photo?). What, no lapdance photos?

    Would you let your stepdaughters read that post as it was published? If you guys had any shame at all, you’d pull that post and apologize to your readers for a bad attempt to smear a political opponent when you and I both know there are other ways you could have accomplished it more effectively. All you did was give the Anaheim Council Majority fodder to tell voters how sleazy the opposition is.

Comments are closed.